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

 

Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/10961/2017

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Field House	Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 31 October 2019 Decision given orally at hearing	On 20 November 2019

 

 

Before

 

THE HON. MR JUSTICE LANE, PRESIDENT

MR C M G OCKELTON, VICE PRESIDENT

 

Between

 

BO

(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)

 

Appellant

and

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

 

Respondent

 

 

Representation :

 

For the Appellant: Mr C Holmes, Counsel, Citizens Advice Bureau (Bolton)

For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

 

 

 

DECISION AND REASONS

 

1.              We find, for the reasons elucidated by Underhill LJ in the decision of the Court of Appeal, that the decision of Judge Davies is flawed in law. That decision was characterised by the Court of Appeal as very poorly reasoned. We would, with respect, concur with that view. The judge made a number of problematic findings, not least that the appellant had got certain documentation, which remains entirely unexplained. The judge also failed to find where the appellant came from.

2.              The issue for us is whether or not any part of Judge Davies' findings should stand. Given that there has been a material failure in the fact-finding exercise I have just indicated, there would need to be good reasons shown for preserving any part of the findings of fact of the judge; in particular his findings on credibility. We do not consider that any good reasons have been demonstrated.

3.              Accordingly, we set aside Judge Davies's decision and we remit the case to be re-heard in its entirety in the First-tier Tribunal by a judge other than Judge Davies. For the avoidance of doubt, no findings of fact are preserved. The decision to remit rather than to hold the case in the Upper Tribunal is predicated on the extent and nature of the fact-finding exercise, which is going to be necessary.

 

Direction Regarding Anonymity - Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

 

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 their family. This direction applies both to the appellant and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed Date: 20 November 2019

 

 

 

The Hon. Mr Justice Lane

President of the Upper Tribunal

Immigration and Asylum Chamber