Tribunal decisions

The decision

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER Case No: UI-2026-004287
First-tier Tribunal No: PA/54478/2025

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Decision & Reasons Issued:

On 16th of September 2026

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEBEDE

Between

SNS
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant, a citizen of Somalia, has been given permission to appeal against the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Kempton dismissing his appeal against the respondent’s decision to refuse his asylum and human rights claim.
2. In a Rule 24 response dated 25 August 2026, the Secretary of State effectively concedes that the appellant’s grounds of appeal identify an error of law in the judge’s decision and invites the Upper Tribunal to determine the error of law issue on the papers with a view to remitting the case to the First-tier Tribunal.
3. In light of the submissions made in the Rule 24 response, a Notice and Directions was sent out to the parties on 15 September 2026,, in the following terms:
“3. In light of the concession made by the respondent, and having considered the grant of permission from the First-tier Tribunal, I am minded to set aside the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Kempton for the reasons set out in the grounds and in the grant of permission. Given the nature and extent of the error of law identified, I am of the view that there should be no preserved findings of fact and the matter ought properly to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a hearing de novo. I am accordingly minded to remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing.
4. Any reasonable objection to this course is to be made in writing to the Upper Tribunal not later than 5 days from the date this decision is sent out. Following that period, and in the absence of any satisfactory response, the Upper Tribunal will proceed as set out at [3] above. “
4. It now appears that, prior to the above Notice and Directions being sent out to the parties, the appellant made further submissions on his own volition, on 14 September 2026, responding to the respondent’s Rule 24 response and agreeing with the substance of that response, and inviting the Upper Tribunal to set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision and remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing with no findings preserved.
5. Whilst I note that it was the judge’s findings on internal relocation which gave rise to the accepted error of law, the decision granting permission and the submissions from both parties are in agreement that that arose from an accepted misunderstanding by the judge of the appellant’s case as to the source and location of his claimed problems. As such the parties are in agreement, and I so find, that the judge’s decision is unsustainable in light of that apparent misunderstanding, to the extent that a complete and de novo re-making of the decision in the appeal is necessary with fresh findings of fact. On that basis the appropriate course is for the appeal to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard and decided afresh.
6. In the circumstances, and given the agreed position of both parties, I set aside the decision of First-tier Tribunal Kempton promulgated on 9 June 2026 for reason of error of law and remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing, with no findings preserved.
Notice of Decision
7. The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error on a point of law. The decision is set aside. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be dealt with afresh pursuant to section 12(2)(b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and Practice Statement 7.2(b).

S Kebede
Upper Tribunal Judge Kebede

Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber

15 September 2026