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.
For the Respondent: Mr R Sharma, Counsel instructed by Paul John & Co Solicitors
For convenience purposes I shall employ the appellations "Appellant" and "Respondent" as at first instance. The Appellant is a Nepalese national who appealed against the decision of the Respondent dated 2 nd October 2014 to give removal directions in accordance with Section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
The appeal was heard by First-tier Tribunal Judge Adio and allowed on the basis that the Respondent's decision was not in accordance with the law.
Permission to appeal was initially refused but was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Gill on the basis that the judge had arguably failed to take into account the guidance given at paragraph 57 of MA (Nigeria) [2016] UKUT 450 .
There was no breach of what was said in MA and no error in law. The decision should stand.
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.