PA/10961/2017

  • 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/10961/2017


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 31 October 2019
Decision given orally at hearing
On 20 November 2019





Before

THE HON. MR JUSTICE LANE, PRESIDENT
MR C M G OCKELTON, VICE PRESIDENT

Between

BO
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)

Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr C Holmes, Counsel, Citizens Advice Bureau (Bolton)
For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer



DECISION AND REASONS

1. We find, for the reasons elucidated by Underhill LJ in the decision of the Court of Appeal, that the decision of Judge Davies is flawed in law. That decision was characterised by the Court of Appeal as very poorly reasoned. We would, with respect, concur with that view. The judge made a number of problematic findings, not least that the appellant had got certain documentation, which remains entirely unexplained. The judge also failed to find where the appellant came from.
2. The issue for us is whether or not any part of Judge Davies' findings should stand. Given that there has been a material failure in the fact-finding exercise I have just indicated, there would need to be good reasons shown for preserving any part of the findings of fact of the judge; in particular his findings on credibility. We do not consider that any good reasons have been demonstrated.
3. Accordingly, we set aside Judge Davies's decision and we remit the case to be re-heard in its entirety in the First-tier Tribunal by a judge other than Judge Davies. For the avoidance of doubt, no findings of fact are preserved. The decision to remit rather than to hold the case in the Upper Tribunal is predicated on the extent and nature of the fact-finding exercise, which is going to be necessary.

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

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






Signed Date: 20 November 2019



The Hon. Mr Justice Lane
President of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber