Where an asylum seeker was seeking to escape from persecution in one area of his home country, the court must ask if an escape to a safe area in his country of origin is available and appropriate. A failure of the country to which an asylum seeker would be returned to provide for the basic norms of civil political and socio-economic human rights would not constitute persecution under the Convention.
Judges:
Lord Wool MR, Potter, Brooke LJJ
Citations:
Times 01-Aug-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2089, [1998] QB 929, [1997] Imm AR 568, [1997] 3 WLR 1162, [1997] 4 All ER 210, [1997] INLR 182
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – AE and FE v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 16-Jul-2003
The appellants challenged orders denying them asylum status. The result would be to require them to return home but subject to relocation within a different geographical area.
Held: For the purposes of considering refugee status, the . .
Cited – MJ (Angola) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 20-May-2010
The applicant had been ordered to be deported and returned to Angola, but at the same time he was a detained mental patient. He argued that a return would breach his Article 8 rights.
Held: The respondent was entitled to decide to deport the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration, Human Rights
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.142486