Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This is an appeal from a decision of an adjudicator (Mr J Bailey), sitting at Hatton Cross on 11 October 2002, dismissing an asylum and human rights appeal by a citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo [DRC]. Leave was given on the basis that the adjudicator might not have
As to the psychologist [sic] report, the conclusions of that report are based on self reporting by the Appellant. As I found the Appellant's story to be a falsehood I can put little weight upon the report which has in my view been induced by manufactured statements by the Appellant to the psychologist.
On this occasion [the appellant] made only three errors. This performance is consistent with that which would be predicted of a person of at least low average cognitive ability (IQ) and is not indicative of any significant level of mental impairment.
While it would have been better to explain what mistakes the appellant had made, that does provide some sort of score on a recognized test, and relate it to the normal range.
In interview [the appellant] seemed to be trying his best to answer my questions accurately and he was very cooperative. He appeared to have no difficulty in following the translation, which was in his native Lingala.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.