UI-2024-001017

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

The decision



IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER
Case No: UI-2024-001017

First-tier Tribunal No: PA/52004/2023
LP/03299/2023

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Decisions Issued:
On 18th February 2026

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE LOUGHRAN

Between

MA
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Order Regarding Anonymity

Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the appellant is granted anonymity. The appellant shall be referred to by the initials MA throughout these proceedings.

No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the appellant.
Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court.


NOTE AND DIRECTIONS
1. The appellant appeals with permission against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Chapman (‘the judge’), dated 17 January 2024, dismissing the appellant’s protection and human rights claim.
2. The matter was listed for a listening appointment on 3 March 2025.
3. On 19 May 2025, the respondent provided a response under 24 rule of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (“Upper Tribunal Procedure Rules”) accepting that the judge materially erred in law. The respondent accepts that the judge acted with procedural unfairness by finding that there was a lack of detail in the appellant’s account without the appellant being afforded the opportunity to clarify and provide more detail on those issues.
4. The respondent accepts that the judge’s error infects the overall credibility assessment so that no findings of fact can be preserved. The respondent does not oppose to the appeal being remitted to the First-tier Tribunal.
DIRECTIONS
1. It is my preliminary view that, in light of the respondent’s concession that the appropriate course is:
a. To set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal, in its entirety, with no findings of fact preserved; and
b. Remit the decision to the First-tier Tribunal, to be heard afresh, by a different judge.
2. Unless within ten working days of the issue of these directions there is any written objection to this course of action, supported by cogent argument, the Upper Tribunal will proceed to determine the appeal without an oral hearing and will remit it to the First-tier Tribunal.
3. In the absence of a timely response by a party, it will be presumed that it has no objection to the course of action proposed.


G. Loughran

Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber


5 June 2025