Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: UI-2025-000758
First-tier Tribunal Number: PA/63356/2023
LP/09620/2024

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Decision & Reasons issued:

On 23rd of May 2025

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE FRANCES
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL GRIMES

Between

R I
(anonymity direction made)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr A Malik, instructed by Crystal Chambers
For the Respondent: Mr M Parvar, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

Heard at Field House on 20 May 2025

Order Regarding Anonymity

Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the Appellant is granted anonymity.

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.

DECISION AND REASONS

1. The appellant is a citizen of Iraq born in 1996. He appeals against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Abebrese (‘the judge’), promulgated on 14 November 2024, dismissing his appeal against the refusal of his protection claim on asylum, humanitarian protection and human rights grounds.

2. Permission to appeal was granted by First-tier Tribunal Judge Athwal on 13 February 2025 for the following reasons:

“The grounds assert that the Judge erred in law by making a mistake about the hearing. The Judge stated that the HOPO was present and she cross-examined the Appellant and made oral submissions. The Appellant has provided a statement from instructed counsel to confirm that was not correct and that the HOPO was not present. It is arguable that this is a material error of law that could result in unfairness to the Appellant.”

3. The respondent served a rule 24 response dated 25 February 2025 stating that she did not oppose the appellant’s application for permission to appeal. The respondent confirmed that the Presenting Officer named in the decision attended court for the first case on the list that day but was unwell and allowed this case to be heard without representation from the respondent.

4. At the hearing before us, the parties indicated that they were in agreement that, as the appellant had been deprived of a fair hearing in the First-tier Tribunal, the appropriate course was to remit the appeal for a fresh hearing in the First-tier Tribunal.

5. We agree that, although the appellant was able to fully present his case in the First-tier Tribunal, we cannot be sure what evidence the judge took into account given his erroneous assertion at paragraph 8 that the appellant was cross-examined by the Presenting Officer and that he heard submissions from both parties.

6. We find that the judge erred in law and we set aside the decision dated 14 November 2024. None of the judge’s findings are preserved. We have decided in accordance with paragraph 7.2 of the Practice Statements of 25 September 2012 to remit the appellant’s appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.

7. The Tribunal is directed pursuant to section 12(3) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 to reconsider the appeal at a hearing before a First-tier Tribunal Judge other than First-tier Tribunal Judge Abebrese.

Notice of Decision

The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside.
None of the judge’s findings shall stand.

The matter is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for rehearing before a First-tier Tribunal Judge other than First-tier Tribunal Judge Abebrese.

A Grimes

Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber

20 May 2025