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 Abbotsbury observed that appeal courts should be particularly wary of interfering with evidential conclusions made in relation to claims for asylum, in which, among other things, the paucity and fragility of the evidence are likely to be acute. On the other hand he added: ‘ . . given the potentially severe, even catastrophic, consequences of a mistaken rejection of an appeal, where fear of ill-treatment (or worse) is alleged, it is plainly right to scrutinise any [such] decision . . very carefully’
Ward, Sedley LJJ Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2008] EWCA Civ 310
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – KV (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 6-Mar-2019
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.266558