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.
The judge found at [20] that Mr Xie gave "long rambling answers" to questions put to him in cross-examination noting that his answers "were contradictory." The judge had not specified what parts of his evidence he found to be contradictory. At [21] the judge noted the sponsor had said that his correct name was Xue Qun. When he had claimed asylum, his name had been recorded as Xhe Hui Xie. The sponsor had "not bothered to change this since." The judge also recorded [19] that Mr Xie is a British citizen.
The judge was also critical [25] of the fact that the Cellmark report which was dated 28 April 2014 had not been submitted to the respondent "at some stage between that date and the date of the hearing in an attempt to resolve matters without the need for an appeal ...".
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal promulgated on 6 March 2015 is set aside. None of the findings of fact shall stand. The appeal is remitted to the First-tier Tribunal for that Tribunal to remake the decision.
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.