UK - Court of Appeal, AA (Iran), R (on the application of) v Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) & Anor, [2013] EWCA Civ 1523

Facts:

The applicant arrived in the UK as an unaccompanied minor and claimed asylum. He was refused asylum at first instance by the UK government, and subsequently on appeal at the Tribunal. Adverse credibility findings were made in both cases – it was not believed that he was at risk of persecution on grounds of imputed political opinion, and it was not believed that he had lost all contact with his family, nor that his father had been killed.

The applicant claimed that the UK’s failure to fulfil its duty to attempt to trace his family members in Iran was adverse to his claim because, had the UK government done so, it might have assisted him in establishing credibility. Had tracing been attempted it may have produced material which would have assisted his case (namely, that his family cannot be found).

Decision & reasoning:

The Court relied on its earlier decision in the case of KA (Afghanistan), citing paragraph 25 of that case for the proposition that the relevance of the government’s failure to trace a child’s family members depends on the facts. In this case, the core of the applicant’s asylum claim was disbelieved by the Tribunal, which then went on to make a finding that the applicant’s assertion he had no contact with his family was also not credible. The Court held that this was a reasonable finding for the Tribunal to make as if there was no persecution it was more likely than not that the applicant did indeed have family contact. Although the government had admittedly failed in its duty to attempt to trace his family, on the facts of this case, the Court was of the view that it had no impact on the rejection of his claim.  

Outcome:

Appeal dismissed.

Observations/comments:

See further KA Afghanistan, for an explanation of the same principles.