Appeal against the order of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal following a reconsideration hearing that the tribunal’s earlier determination promulgated dismissing the appellant’s appeal against the Secretary of State’s refusal of his asylum claim should stand, because there was no error of law in the tribunal’s conclusion in 2007 that the appellant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution in Iran.
Sullivan LJ said: ‘In reality, a decision by the UNHCR as to refugee status will, given the UNHCR’s particular expertise and responsibilities under the Refugee Convention, be given considerable weight by the Secretary of State and the tribunal unless in any particular case the decision taker concludes that there are cogent reasons not to do so on the facts of that individual case. It would be just as unrealistic to contend that a decision by the UNHCR as to refugee status must always be given considerable weight regardless of any indications to the contrary as it would be to contend that it could be given less than considerable weight for no good reason.’
Judges:
Lord Neuberger MR, Sullivan, Gross LJJ
Citations:
[2010] EWCA Civ 1457, [2011] INLR 206
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – IA (Iran) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department (Scotland) SC 29-Jan-2014
The appellant Iranian challenged refusal of his claim for asylum. He had been granted refugee status in Iraq and in Turkey by the United Nations commission, but on arrival in the UK, his asylum claim had been rejected on the basis of the credibility . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427362