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

Description: Description: Asylum and Immigration tribunal-b&w-tiff"

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/09092/2018

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at: Manchester Civil Justice Centre	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 21 st October 2019	On 24 th October 2019

 

Before

 

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE BRUCE

 

 

Between

 

AAMH

(anonymity direction made)

Appellant

and

 

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Respondent

 

 

For the Appellant: Ms Faryl, Lei Dat and Baig Solicitors

For the Respondent: Mr Tan, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

1.              The Appellant is a national of Sudan born in 1994. He appeals with permission the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge O'Hanlon) to dismiss his protection appeal.

2.              For the purpose of this appeal the material finding of fact made by the First-tier Tribunal is that the Appellant is a member of the Hausa, a non-Arab tribe.

3.              Having made that finding the First-tier Tribunal directed itself to the country guidance in AA (non-Arab Darfuris - Relocation) Sudan CG [2009] UKAIT 00056 and MM (Darfuris) Sudan CG [2015] UKUT 10 (IAC), to the effect that "all non-Arab Darfuris would face persecution in Sudan on the basis of their ethnicity alone". It is implicit in the reasoning [at FTT §46] that applying that country guidance, the Appellant would win his appeal.

4.              The Tribunal was not however satisfied that the country guidance continues to apply. It noted the Respondent's submission that the situation in Sudan has improved for non-Arab Darfuris and found the Respondent's Country Policy and Information Note ('the CPIN') to constitute cogent evidence justifying departure from the guidance in AA and MM. On that basis the appeal was dismissed.

5.              I am satisfied that in so doing the First-tier Tribunal erred. Whilst Mr Tan did submit that Judge O'Hanlon would have been entitled to reach the decision that he did on the basis of the evidence before him, he accepts that Judge O'Hanlon erred in law in that he failed to have regard to any of the evidence presented, or submissions made, on the Appellant's behalf. That being the case his decision cannot stand.

6.              It is now clear that the information in the CPIN is not capable of displacing the extant country guidance, which should continue to be applied: AAR & AA (Non-Arab Darfuris - return) Sudan [2019] UKUT 282 (IAC).

7.              I therefore set the decision of the First-tier Tribunal aside and substitute it by a decision allowing the appeal.

 

Anonymity

8.              The Appellant is a refugee. As such I am satisfied, having had regard to the guidance in the Presidential Guidance Note No 1 of 2013: Anonymity Orders, that it would be appropriate to make an order in accordance with Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 in the following terms:

"Unless and until a tribunal or court directs otherwise, the Appellant is granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify him or any member of his family. This direction applies to, amongst others, both the Appellant and the Respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings"

 

Decisions

9.              The determination of the First-tier Tribunal contains material error of law and it is set aside.

10.          The decision in the appeal is remade as follows:

"the appeal is allowed on protection grounds".

11.          There is an order for anonymity.

 

 

Upper Tribunal Judge Bruce

21 ^st October 2019