MH (Sudan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

Permission to appeal may properly be granted where there is a real question whether the alleged error of law was made out. Where a second issue depends on the first, permission on that issue may be adjourned so the court hearing the substantive appeal can assess it in a clearer context.

The claimant sought renewed permission to appeal after refusal on the papers. The first issue was whether the Asylum & Immigration Tribunal had been entitled to find an error of law in an adjudicator’s favourable decision and remit the case. The second concerned internal relocation of a Darfurian claimant to Khartoum and depended on the first issue.

1. Permission was granted on the first-stage issue because there was a real question whether the Home Office’s alleged error of law was made out, and whether any additional error could properly be identified.
2. Permission on the internal-relocation issue was adjourned. If the first appeal succeeded, that issue would fall away; if it failed, the full court would be better placed to assess its viability.
3. The application was granted, with liberty to apply.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Renewed application granted after refusal of permission on the papers by Carnwath LJ.
• Asylum & Immigration Tribunal: Found an error of law in an adjudicator’s favourable decision and sent the case to a second-stage appeal. AIT No. AS/13238/2004.