Case summaries
UK - Asylum & Immigration Tribunal, 5 July 2005, SM (Section 8: Judge’s Process) Iran [2005] UKAIT 116
Country of applicant:
Iran
Keywords:
Assessment of facts and circumstances, Credibility assessment, Individual assessment, Relevant Facts
UK Legislation, which required a court to treat evidence in a particular way was not intended to affect the general process of deriving facts from evidence and in particular the principles that all evidence had to be evaluated in the round.
Date of decision:
05-07-2005
UK - Court of Appeal, 18 March 2003, Q and others, (R on the appplication of) v the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 364
Keywords:
Assessment of facts and circumstances, Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees
This case considered of the support available for asylum seekers. It was held that the system in place was not procedurally fair and that Art 3 of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was engaged. Judicial review of the refusal was not an adequate remedy for refusal of support where the administrative procedure was unfair and inadequate.
Date of decision:
18-03-2003
UK - Court of Appeal, 24 April 2002, S & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 539
Country of applicant:
Croatia
This case concerned Country Guidance case law and the Court of Appeal’s direction on its application in subsequent asylum claims (see judicial guidance in comments section below).
Date of decision:
24-04-2002
ECtHR - Čonka v Belgium, Application no. 51564/99, 5 February 2002
Country of applicant:
Slovakia
Keywords:
Effective access to procedures, Detention, Effective remedy (right to), Individual assessment, Race
The applicants were unlawfully detained and had no effective remedy to challenge their detention. There was a finding that they had been collectively expelled, given the context of their expulsion along with many others of the same nationality, and as their individual circumstances had not been adequately taken into consideration.
Date of decision:
05-02-2002