The word ‘persecution’ must be given its ordinary and natural meaning when considering an application for asylum based on a fear of persecution.
Aldous LJ said: ‘Mr Ashford-Thom, who appeared for the Secretary of State, submitted that the word ‘persecution’ was an ordinary English word and it was for the special adjudicator to decide whether the facts as found amounted to persecution for a Convention reason. The fact that a court might, or would have, come to a different conclusion did not mean that the special adjudicator had erred in law. That only arose if this court concluded that the special adjudicator’s conclusion was unreasonable, in the sense that it was a decision that no reasonable adjudicator could come to.
That I believe to be correct.’
Judges:
Aldous LJ
Citations:
[1996] EWCA Civ 582, 1997 Imm AR 137
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Demirkaya v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 23-Jun-1999
Whether an asylum applicant had a well founded fear of persecution if he returned home, is always a question of fact and degree, and could not be made a question of law. Even so where there was a clear risk of repeated rather than single beatings if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.140449