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.
             This matter first came before me on 1 September 2021 when, for the reasons set out in the attached decision, I concluded that the decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge C Scott promulgated on 29 December 2020 was to be set aside as it involved the making of an error of law.
             In its decision, the FtT allowed the appellant's against a decision made on 15 October 2018 to revoke his protection status and to refuse a human rights claim. In that decision, the Secretary of State had also decided to cease his refugee status and to refuse his human rights claim. This is not, however, a case to which section 75 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act applies as the appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of less than two years.
             The judge found [62]
   It is for the respondent to satisfy the tribunal that there has been a significant and non-temporary change in the circumstances, so that the circumstances which caused the person to be a refugee have ceased to apply and there is no other basis on which they would be held to be a refugee. I find that the respondent has not satisfied that burden for the following reasons:
(b) The respondent has not provided any reasons as to why the appellant was granted refugee status in 1996. As such, I am unable to concluded that there has been a significant and non-temporary change in the circumstances which caused the appellant to be a refugee; and
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.