Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Appellant claimed asylum on 11 August 2017, which was refused on 7 February 2018. The First-tier Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 12 July 2018. The Upper Tribunal found the Judge made material errors: (1) misunderstanding the Appellant's evidence about leaving his family home before attending house church meetings, and (2) misapplying legal precedent in assessing Reverend Hooper's evidence regarding the Appellant's Christian conversion. The decision was set aside and remitted for a de novo hearing in Birmingham. An anonymity order was issued to protect the Appellant's identity.
Issues
- The second issue involves the Judge's alleged misapplication of the Mibanga [2005] EWCA Civ 367 case. The Judge evaluated Reverend Hooper's evidence after discrediting the Appellant's account, which the Appellant contends violates the principle of assessing all evidence 'in the round' as required by Mibanga.
- The first issue concerns whether the Judge's adverse credibility finding regarding the Appellant's claim to have hosted house church meetings in his family home was based on a flawed premise. The Appellant argued he had left his family home before attending such meetings, but the Judge's decision hinged on disbelieving this aspect of his account.
Holdings
- The Judge materially erred in the first ground by misunderstanding the Appellant's case regarding the location of house church meetings, as the Appellant had left his family home before attending such meetings and never claimed hosting them at his home.
- The Judge misapplied Mibanga [2005] EWCA Civ 367 in the second ground by improperly assessing Reverend Hooper's evidence in light of prior credibility findings against the Appellant, rather than independently evaluating it.
- The Judge's decision was set aside, and the matter was remitted for a de novo hearing in Birmingham due to material errors of law in both grounds.
Remedies
The Judge made a material error of law, leading to the decision being set aside. The case has been remitted for a de novo hearing in Birmingham to reassess the facts.
Legal Principles
The Upper Tribunal found a material error of law in the First-tier Tribunal's assessment of evidence, specifically the improper sequence of evaluating the Appellant's credibility and Reverend Hooper's testimony. This error required remittal for a de novo hearing, emphasizing that credibility findings and witness evidence must be considered independently.
Precedent Name
Mibanga
Cited Statute
- Immigration Acts
- Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008
Judge Name
Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Saffer
Passage Text
- 9. In relation to the second ground I accept that there is a material error of law in the way the Judge assessed the evidence of Reverend Hooper. He made findings in relation to the Appellant's credibility and then went on to consider Reverend Hooper's evidence in light of those findings. The two things are entirely separate. Even if the Appellant was not credible about what had happened to him in Iran, Reverend Hooper may be right that the Appellant had converted to Christianity. Despite having said twice that the evidence was looked at in the round, I am not satisfied that the Judge considered the evidence of Reverend Hooper prior to finding that the Appellant had not established it was reasonably likely he had converted to Christianity.
- 3. Permission to appeal was granted by Judge Smith on 6th September 2018 on two grounds. Firstly, the adverse credibility finding at [22] that the Appellant would not have hosted house church meetings in his family home is arguably based on a flawed premise as it was the Appellant's evidence that he had moved out of his family home away from his strict father at this stage. Secondly, the Judge misapplied Mibanga [2005] EWCA Civ 367 in that the evidence of Reverend Hooper was found to attract little weight largely on the basis that the Appellant's prior account had already been found to be lacking.