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.
Judicial Review of a determination of TNG Bradshaw, Adjudicator, dated 1 April 2002, and of a decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal dated 10 May 2002.
I further agree with the Respondents that any activities which the Appellant may have had with the SDF were of very low level and not likely to draw him to the adverse attention of the authorities....
Having regard to my findings on credibility and to the fact that even if he were to be believed, the Appellant was no more than a low level supporter of the SDF, I am not satisfied that he would be reasonably likely to be of interest to the police or the authorities in Cameroon were he questioned on his return.
As far as the Appellant's ground of Appeal under the Refugee Convention is concerned he has not shown that he has a well founded fear of persecution were he now returned to Cameroon. Accordingly on this ground his appeal will not succeed.
Turning to the Human Rights Convention, on the basis of the findings I have made, the Appellant has not established substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk of harm to him if returned to Cameroon amounting to torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 or that his return to Cameroon would amount to a breach of Article 6 of the ECHR by the United Kingdom.
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.