Tanveer Ahmed v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Pakistan): IAT 19 Feb 2002

The following principles are applicable when considering documents submitted in resisting directions for removal: ‘1. In asylum and human rights cases it is for an individual claimant to show that a document on which he seeks to rely can be relied on.
2. The decision maker should consider whether a document is one on which reliance should properly be placed after looking at all the evidence in the round.
3. Only very rarely will there be the need to make an allegation of forgery, or evidence strong enough to support it. The allegation should not be made without such evidence. Failure to establish the allegation on the balance of probabilities to the higher civil standard does not show that a document is reliable. The decision maker still needs to apply principles 1 and 2.’


Collins J P, Ockleton DP, Moulden VP


[2002] Imm AR 318, [2002] INLR 345, [2002] UKIAT 00439



Cited by:

ConfirmedMJ (Singh v Belgium : Tanveer Ahmed Unaffected) Afghanistan UTIAC 1-May-2013
UTIAC The conclusions of the European Court of Human Rights in Singh v Belgium (Application No. 33210/2011) neither justify nor require any departure from the guidance set out in Tanveer Ahmed [2002] Imm AR 318 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221800