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] ( and/or any member of his family, expert, witness or other person the Tribunal considers should not be identified ) 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 ( and/or other person ). Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court .
             By the decision of the Upper Tribunal (Judge Sheridan) issued on 9.10.23, the appellant, a national of China, has been granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Jepson) dismissing her appeal against the respondent's decision of 22.9.22 to refuse her protection and human rights claims.
             Following the helpful submission of the legal representatives, I reserved my decision to be given in writing, which I now do. The Upper Tribunal has also received and I have taken into account Ms Foot's skeleton argument, dated 13.3.24, as well as the respondent's skeleton argument dated 31.10.23.
             The appellant's claim to be a victim of trafficking and potential victim of re-trafficking had not been considered by the Tribunal in 2019, hence this fresh claim, the refusal of which resulted in the decision now under appeal.
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.