BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments >> AA086392014 [2015] UKAITUR AA086392014 (22 May 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2015/AA086392014.html Cite as: [2015] UKAITUR AA086392014, [2015] UKAITUR AA86392014 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/08639/2014
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
|
Heard at Bradford |
Decision & Reasons Promulgated |
|
On 13 th May 2015 |
On 22 nd May 2015 |
|
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE D E TAYLOR
Between
ARSHAD ALWAN
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT Made)
Appellant
and
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr B Marshall, Solicitor, of NBS Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr M Diwnycz, Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION AND REASONS
1. This is the Appellant's appeal against the decision of Judge Fox made following a hearing at Bradford on 4 th December 2014.
2. Thie Appellant is a citizen of Iraq who claimed to have left there with his family in 2006 and fled to Syria. He left Syria in 2010 and thereafter, until October 2013, spent time in a number of different European countries.
3. Although the Respondent put in a Rule 24 response defending the determination Mr Diwnycz sensibly accepted that it cannot stand.
4. The judge uses a series of unfortunate and inappropriate expressions in his determination including “travels around Europe to gain entry by way of a shopping exercise” and “the family having achieved the Holy Grail of refugee status” and “the Appellant left his family in Syria for purely mercenary and personal reasons to travel around Europe to secure the best deal that he could find for himself”.
5. His language gives the impression that the totality of the evidence may not have been impartially considered.
6. There is a further point in that the Respondent's case was put on the basis that the Appellant could relocate to Basra. The judge said that he was satisfied that relocation to Basra or Baghdad was not viable and if relocation is to be considered it should be to the north of the country. This was never argued by the Secretary of State either in the refusal letter or at the hearing and Mr Marshall reasonably argued that he was deprived of an opportunity of arguing that relocation to Northern Ira q would be unduly harsh.
7. Both parties agreed that the appeal would have to be reheard de novo.
8. The decision of Judge Fox is set aside. The appeal will have to be heard again at Bradford before a First-tier Judge other than Judge Fox with all issues at large.
No anonymity direction is made.
Signed Date
Upper Tribunal Judge Taylor
