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 because the case involves protection issues. 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 appealed the respondent's decision dated 06 February 2023 to refuse a protection and human rights claim.
             It is clear from the decision that the judge went on to direct herself properly with reference to the relevant country guidance decisions in BA (Demonstrators in Britain - risk on return) Iran CG [2011] UKUT 36 and XX (PJAK, sur place activities, Facebook) Iran CG [2022] UKUT 23 (IAC) [32]. However, it is accepted that the judge did not make specific reference to the country guidance decision in HB (Kurds) Iran CG [2018] UKUT 430 (IAC) , which was relied on in the appellant's skeleton argument.
         The appellant applied for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on the following grounds:
(i)             The First-tier Tribunal erred in failing to have regard to the country guidance in HB (Kurds) Iran CG [2018] UKUT 430 (IAC) .
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.