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.
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
For the Appellants:������� Mr I Palmer and Ms S Pinder, instructed by Fadiga & Co, Solicitors
(1) Having regard to the provisions of articles 365 and 365A of the Sri Lankan Penal Code, gay men in Sri Lanka constitute a particular social group.
(2) ��Gay men in civil partnerships� in Sri Lanka do not constitute a particular social group for the purposes of the Refugee Convention. The Sri Lankan authorities� failure to recognise alternative marital and quasi-marital statuses such as civil partnership or homosexual marriage which are available in other countries of the world does not, without more, amount to a flagrant breach of core human rights.
(3) Applying the test set out by Lord Rodger in the Supreme Court judgment in HJ (Iran) & HT (Cameroon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31 , in general the treatment of gay men in Sri Lanka does not reach the standard of persecution or serious harm.�
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.