The claimant said that he had been tortured in Sri Lanka. The SSHD said the injuries were falsifications, inflicted at the claimant’s request.
Held: KV’s appeal succeeded, and the case was remitted for a fresh determination. The Istanbul Protocol was to be used: An expert investigating an allegation of torture should recognise the Istanbul Protocol as equally authoritative to the relevant Practice Direction on expert evidence in immigration and asylum cases at the FTT and the tribunal. The tribunal had failed to allow that the self-infliction of wounds is inherently unlikely, and there was ample evidence of its use by the authorities in Sri Lanka.
Lady Hale (President), Lord Wilson, Lady Black, Lord Briggs, Lord Kitchin
[2019] UKSC 10
Bailii, Bailii Summary
England and Wales
Citing:
At UT – KV (Scarring – Medical Evidence) UTIAC 23-May-2014
UTIAC 1. When preparing medico-legal reports doctors should not – and should not feel obliged to – reach conclusions about causation of scarring which go beyond their own clinical expertise.
2. Doctors . .
Appeal from – KV (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 7-Mar-2017
The appellant sought asylum, claiming that he had been tortured as an ally of the Tamil Tigers. His claims had been disbelieved. . .
Cited – SA (Somalia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 10-Oct-2006
The task for which an asylum-seeker tendered a medical report was to provide ‘a clear statement as to the consistency of old scars found with the history given . . , directed to the particular injuries said to have occurred as a result of the . .
Cited – RT (Medical Reports, Causation of Scarring) Sri Lanka IAT 7-Feb-2008
. .
Cited – SS (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 10-Apr-2008
Appeal against refusal of asylum claim.
Held: Although this was substantially an appeal on the factual findings, the logical basis of the decision was flawed. The decision was quashed, and remitted for rehearing.
Lord Neuberger of . .
Cited – AM, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 26-Apr-2012
AM claimed that she had been illegally detained, purportedly pursuant to paragraph 16(2) of the 1971 Act as an illegal immigrant pending removal. . .
Cited – Mehmet Eren v Turkey ECHR 14-Oct-2008
The Court relied upon the conclusion of a medical report about the consistency of the clinical findings with the applicant’s account of serious ill-treatment while he was in police custody. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.634243