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 >> PA119372016 [2018] UKAITUR PA119372016 (15 February 2018) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2018/PA119372016.html Cite as: [2018] UKAITUR PA119372016 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA /11937/2016
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Field House |
Decision and Reasons Promulgated |
On 12 February 2018 |
On 15 February 2018 |
|
|
Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEKIĆ
Between
M S
(anonymity order made)
Appellant
and
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent
Representation :
For the Appellant: Mr A Jafar, Counsel instructed by Liyon Legal Aid
For the Respondent: Mr P Duffy, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
1. The appellant is a Sri Lankan national born on 27 March 1990. His asylum appeal was dismissed by First-tier Tribunal Judge Hussain by way of a determination promulgated on 21 June 2017.
2. Permission to appeal was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Pitt on 21 December 2017 and the matter came before me on 12 February 2017.
3. Mr Duffy stepped in straightaway to concede that the judge had made a material error in failing to consider the report on scarring and the appellant's injuries. It followed that there was no need for Mr Jafar to make anything more than the brief submissions he did.
4. Amongst the many arguable errors of law identified which I do not now need to address, Mr Duffy was quite right to concede the point that the medical evidence was not taken into account. Plainly that was evidence that could have led to a different outcome and the error is therefore material.
5. I set aside the determination in its entirety. The evidence will need to be re-heard so that fresh findings on all matters may be made. To that end, the matter is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for a de novo hearing. No findings are preserved.
6. Decision
7. The First-tier Tribunal made errors of law and the decision is set aside in its entirety. The appeal is remitted for re-hearing to another judge of the First-tier Tribunal.
8. Anonymity
9. I continue the anonymity order made by the First-tier Tribunal.
Signed
Upper Tribunal Judge
Date: 12 February 2018