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.
Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the Appellant is granted anonymity. No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the Appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the Appellant. Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court .
            The Appellant thereafter made further submissions on 18 January 2021, continuing to rely on his profile as a supporter of the BNP in Bangladesh and the UK and also relying on a risk to him from his sur place activities in the UK.
            Judge Cary rejected the Appellant's claims, concluding that the Appellant was only a low-level supporter of the BNP, and that his sur place activities would not come to the attention of the authorities in Bangladesh. He therefore dismissed the appeal.
            The Appellant appealed the Decision on ten grounds summarised as follows:
Ground 1: the Judge failed to consider evidence of online threats made against the Appellant.
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.