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 >> UI2023002181 [2023] UKAITUR UI2023002181 (1 November 2023) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKAITUR/2023/UI2023002181.html Cite as: [2023] UKAITUR UI2023002181 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
|
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER |
UI-2023-002181 PA-54601-2021 |
|
|
|
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Decision & Reasons Issued:
On 1 st November 2023
Before
UT JUDGE MACLEMAN & DEPUTY UT JUDGE FARRELLY
Between
M N
(anonymity order in place)
Appellant
and
S S H D
Respondent
Heard at Edinburgh on 18 October 20123
For the Appellant: Latta & Co, Solicitors, Glasgow
For the Respondent: Miss S Young, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DECISION AND REASONS
1. FtT Judge Komorowski dismissed the appellant's appeal by a decision issued on 15 May 2023.
2. On 20 June 2023 FtT Judge Athwal granted permission to appeal to the UT:
The grounds assert that the Judge erred at [23] when he stated that there was no suggestion that the Appellant's marriage to a Shia man in itself gave rise to a risk of harm from strangers.
I have considered the appellant's skeleton argument and the issue of inter-sect marriage was raised as an issue and addressed in the witness statements. It is arguable that the Judge failed to consider all relevant matters.
3. The decision says at [23]:
It was not suggested that the appellant's marriage to a Shia man, in itself, would give rise to a real risk of harm from strangers (in the absence of instigation by R.A or the appellant's family).
4. Miss Young conceded that was a slip, and the matter was in issue. Representatives agreed that the outcome should be a remit to the FtT.
5. There have been prior appeals involving the appellant and her husband on overlapping issues. There was brief discussion before us of the extent to which the outcomes remain the starting point for future decisions, but that is a matter apt for resolution in the FtT.
6. The FtT made an anonymity order, which is observed herein.
7. The decision of the FtT is set aside, and stands only as a record of what was said at the hearing.
8. The case is remitted to the FtT for fresh hearing before another Judge.
Hugh Macleman
Judge of the Upper Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber
19 October 2023
