PA/07478/2019

  • Case title:  
  • Appellant name:
  • Status of case: Unreported
  • Hearing date:
  • Promulgation date:
  • Publication date:
  • Last updated on:
  • Country:
  • Judges:

The decision


IAC-AH-SAR-V1

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/07478/2019


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 28 February 2020
On 09 March 2020



Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LANE


Between

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Appellant
and

BNA
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Respondent


Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr McVeety, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
For the Respondent: Ms Choudhry, Nebula Law Solicitors


DECISION AND REASONS
1. I shall refer to the appellant as the 'respondent' and the respondent as the 'appellant', as they appeared respectively before the First-tier Tribunal. The appellant was born in 1972 and is a citizen of Iraq. By a decision dated 12 July 2019, the Secretary of State refused his application for international protection. The appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal which in a decision promulgated on 26 November 2019, allowed the appeal.
2. The parties agree that the judge erred in law. The judge should have allowed the appeal on Article 15 (c) (humanitarian protection) grounds and not on asylum grounds. Both parties agree that the decision should be set aside and remade by the Upper Tribunal dismissing the asylum appeal but allowing the appeal on humanitarian protection grounds.

Notice of Decision
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside. I have remade the decision. The appeal is dismissed on asylum grounds. The appeal is allowed on humanitarian protection grounds.

Signed Date 28 February 2020
Upper Tribunal Judge Lane



Direction Regarding Anonymity - Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

Unless and until a Tribunal or court directs otherwise, the appellants are granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify them or any member of their family. This direction applies both to the appellants and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.