Court of Appeal
AK (Afghanistan) v Secretary Of State For The Home Department (2007) 10 May 2007. When the Secretary of State considers whether fresh representations amount to a fresh claim for asylum he must ask the right question and consider how an independent tribunal would view the fresh representations, WM (Democratic Republic of Congo) v Secretary of State [2006] EWCA Civ 1780 applied.
IM (Turkey) v Secretary Of State For The Home Department (2007) 10 May 2007 A tribunal was entitled to overturn the finding of an adjudicator who found an asylum seeker to be at risk of ill treatment on the basis of an assessment of that person's presentation at the hearing. The Tribunal had been entitled to find that the assessment of the adjudicator could not be sustained in the absence of background material to support a finding that there would be a risk on return.
Tkachuk v Secretary Of State For The Department Of Work & Pensions (2007) 16 May 2007 It was open to a social security commissioner to hold that regulation 21ZA(2) Income Support Regulations 1987 was satisfied when finding that receipt by the appellant's solicitors, of a letter from the Secretary of State, notifying the appellant of refugee status, was sufficient for the purposes of satisfying the requirement of notifying the appellant of income support entitlement.
HF (Algeria) V Secretary Of State For The Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 445 At a panel hearing the tribunal had erred in ordering reconsideration of the whole of an appeal when only certain findings had been attacked in the application for reconsideration. Only those issues flawed by a material error of law ought to have been considered at a re-hearing, DK(Serbia) v Secretary of State [2006] EWCA Civ 1747 applied. More Info:
SR (Iran) V Secretary Of State For The Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 460 It was open to the tribunal to hold that an Iranian woman who converted to Christianity would not be at risk on return contrary to the Refugee Convention and the Human Rights Convention on the facts of the case. More Info:
Asylum and Immigration Tribunal
KL (Serbia & Montenegro) v Secretary of State [2007] UKAIT 00044 (Article 8-Lekstaka-delay-near-misses) Lekstaka [2005] EWHC 745 (Admin) did not establish a general proposition that could be applied to other cases. Further, the loss of a right of appeal, for example where ELR is not granted to a minor, does not constitute a particularly significant "disbenefit" unless such a disbenefit creates practical disadvantages such as preventing a person from working or obtaining assistance under the Children Act 1989, see AA (Afghanistan) [2007]EWCA Civ 12 and SB (Bangladesh) [2007] EWCA Civ 28. Notwithstanding the impact of Huang [2007] UKHL 11, the guidance given in TK(Immigration Rules-Policy-Article 8)Jamaica [2007]UKAIT 00025 on "near misses" remains valid. More Info:
