UI-2025-002664

  • 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 Nos.: UI-2025-002664


First-tier Tribunal Nos: PA/50549/2024
LP/02312/2025

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Decision & Reasons Issued:

On 23rd of April 2026

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE GREY

Between

MIA
(Anonymity Order made)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Anonymity Order

Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the appellant is granted anonymity because he is an asylum seeker. 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. This decision has been made without a hearing pursuant to Rule 34 of The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008.
2. This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Green promulgated on 17 April 2025 dismissing the appellant’s protection based appeal. Permission to appeal on all grounds was granted in a decision issued on 25 November 2025 by Upper Tribunal Judge Perkins.
3. In a rule 24 response dated 2 December 2025, the respondent indicated her agreement with the assertion the Judge had erred in law in the assessment of the credibility of the appellant’s account.
4. I have considered the written submissions from the parties provided in response to the directions of UTJ O’Brien issued on 15 December 2025, regarding the disposal of this matter in light of the accepted error of law.
5. I have considered paragraph 7.2 (b) of the Practice Statements of the Immigration and Asylum Chambers of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal and the principles in Begum (Remaking or remittal) Bangladesh [2023] UKUT 46 (IAC). In light of the nature of the accepted errors of law, I am of the view that the nature and extent of the factfinding required is such that remittal for a de novo hearing is the appropriate course of action and that to do otherwise would deny the appellant the benefit of the two stage appeal process.
6. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make a decision without a hearing. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal Judge is set aside with no findings preserved.
NOTICE OF DECISION
The Decision of Judge Green promulgated on 17 April 2025 involved the making of an error of law. I therefore set aside that decision. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing before another judge.


S Grey
Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber
20 April 2026