The applicant appealed rejection of his claim for asylum.
Held: ‘the claimant has wholly failed to demonstrate, even to the very low level of possibility which suffices to quash a certificate, that there is any risk to him if he is returned to Colombo. ‘
Judges:
Munby J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 392 (Admin)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina (ZL and VL) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor’s Department CA 24-Jan-2003
The applicants’ claims for asylum had been rejected as bound to fail, and under the new Act, they were to be removed from the UK. If they wanted to appeal, they they would have to do so from outside the jurisdiction. The section had been brought . .
Cited – PS (Ltte, Internal Flight, Sufficiency of Protection) Sri Lankan CG IAT 28-Oct-2004
. .
Cited – Sinnarasa, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 19-May-2005
Mitting J said: ‘The question which I have to consider is whether on the assumed facts I have recited the claimant cannot, on any view, succeed or her claim is so wholly lacking in substance that it is bound to fail.’ and ‘I have found this a far . .
Cited – Nadanasikamani v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 25-Jan-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.239260