United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments

 

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/12452/2015

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Field House and Given extempore on	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
17 th August 2017 and
Signed and sent to Promulgation on 21 st August 2017.	on 25 th August 2017

 

 

Before

 

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley

 

Between

 

Mr Koy Jonas Koy

(ANONYMITY DIRECTION not made)

 

Appellant

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

 

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

 

For the Appellant: No appearance by or on behalf of the appellant

For the Respondent: Mr Walker

 

 

REASONS FOR FINDING AN ERROR OF LAW

 

 

1. The appellant is a national of Côte d'Ivoire, born on 1 ^st August 2002, who travelled via Brussels to the United Kingdom and entered at Heathrow on 6 ^th January 2015. He travelled on a business visa which expired on 15 ^th January 2015, and two days before expiry on 13 ^th March 2015, he made an asylum claim. His claim was refused by the Secretary of State on 10 ^th September 2015, and, as a result, the appellant appealed.

 

2. He first appealed to the First-tier Tribunal at a hearing on 11 ^th March 2006, when First-tier Tribunal Judge Mayall heard his appeal. His determination was subsequently set aside by Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Macdonald on 4 ^th August 2016, because of a failure by the First Tier Tribunal Judge to consider medical and corroborative evidence and the matter was remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard afresh with none of the findings of Judge Mayall preserved.

 

3. The appeal came for hearing before First-tier Tribunal Judge Plumptre on 3 ^rd March 2017, and again on 25 ^th May 2017. She dismissed the appeal on asylum grounds, on humanitarian protection grounds and on human rights grounds. Unfortunately, there was before the judge a medical report in respect of the appellant. It was a report dated 26 ^th January 2016, by Dr Lechi and it was in the appellant's bundle A4 on page 16. It would have been helpful if the appellant's representatives had submitted one complete comprehensive bundle properly indexed and paginated, but nonetheless, the evidence was before the judge and the judge has materially erred in law by failing to demonstrate that she considered it.

 

4. This morning, Mr Walker, on behalf of the Secretary of State has accepted that this is a clear error of law. I have considered retaining the appeal in the Upper Tribunal for a hearing by himself or one of my Upper Tribunal colleagues, but given the lengthy delay that is likely to ensue if I do, I have concluded, and Mr Walker has agreed with me that the matter must be remitted again to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard afresh.

 

5. I set aside the determination in its entirety and direct that it should be reheard afresh by a judge other than First-tier Tribunal Judge Mayall or Judge Plumptre, who I believe has now retired. Three hours should be allowed for the hearing of the appeal. A French interpreter will be required for the hearing.

 

Richard Chalkley

Upper Tribunal Judge Chalkley