PA/10155/2017

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

The decision


Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/10155/2017

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 27 June 2018 & 26 September 2018
On 19 March 2019


Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE G A BLACK

Between

shwan ali
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)

Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

DECISION AND REASONS - remaking


1. Following the decision and directions made on 27th June 2018 that there was an error of law, a further hearing was listed on 26th September at which neither the appellant nor his representative attended. Mr Jarvis, representing the respondent requested further time in which to respond to the directions, which was granted. I directed that the responses should be by way of written submissions.

Submissions

2. I have received written submissions from the respondent dated 2.10.2018 but nothing from the appellant or his representatives.

3. The appellant has failed to provide any written or oral evidence pursuant to my direction in the EOL decision promulgated on 5th July 2018.

4. The respondent submits that the law establishes that the onus is on the appellant to show that a) he does not have access to his CSID or other ID document or b) could not have that document/ information sent to him in the UK to enable him to approach the Iraqi embassy in the UK (AA (article 15c Iraq CG [2015] UKUT 544 (IAC) (paras 173-177). It is further submitted that the appellant has failed to make out his case that he does not have a CSID or that he could not get one with help from family.

Decision and reasons

5. I have regard to the fact that the appellant's core claim was disbelieved by the FtT and the appellant gave inconsistent evidence to the respondent and to the FtT as to what documents he did have or had access to [48]. He stated to the respondent in interview that he had some identity documents for Greece and perhaps Iraq (with his uncle) accessible to him via friends. Before the FtT he denied that his uncle had his Iraqi ID and denied that he had any identity documents from Greece [29]. I am satisfied that in the absence of further evidence, which the appellant has declined to provide, I can proceed on the basis as submitted by the respondent. I am satisfied that evidence to the FtT was not reliable in light of the credibility findings made and that the account given to the respondent in interview represents the actual position. I find that the appellant would be able to access identity documents from his uncle in Iraq or seek his assistance in forwarding those documents to him in the UK. The appellant has failed to discharge the burden on him to show that he would be destitute on return to Iraq.

Decision

6. Having found a material error in law in terms of the FtT's assessment of the risk of destitution on return to Iraq, I now remake the decision and I dismiss the appeal on protection grounds.

7. The appeal is dismissed.


Signed Date 15.3.2019
GA Black
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge G A Black

TO THE RESPONDENT
FEE AWARD

Signed Date 15.3.2019

GA Black
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge G A Black