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.
      The Appellant is a national of Iran born in 1988. He appeals with permission against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Hatton) to dismiss his protection appeal.
      The Respondent rejected the Appellant's claim for want of credibility, and so did Judge Hatton.
      On appeal the Appellant submits that Judge Hatton's decision is infected with several errors of law including irrationality, impermissibly requiring corroboration in an asylum case, and in apparently overlooking material evidence, having found it incredible that the Iranian security services might arrest the Appellant's family members only to release them, when the country background evidence indicates that they regularly do just that.
      The Secretary of State agrees that the alleged errors are made out and invites me to set the decision of Judge Hatton aside in its entirety. I agree that the Secretary of State's concession is well made and so set the decision aside. The parties are in agreement that given the nature of the errors, and the extent of the fact finding required, it would be in the interests of justice to remit the matter for de novo hearing in the First-tier Tribunal.
      Having had regard to paragraph 28 of the Guidance Note 2022 No 2: Anonymity Orders and Hearings in Private , I am therefore satisfied that it would be appropriate to make an order for anonymity in the following terms:
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.