SA v Secretary of State for the Home Department

The appeal was dismissed by consent after the Court of Appeal indicated its tentative view that it should fail. The underlying reconsideration decision had found no error of law in the tribunal’s determination of the asylum and human-rights appeal. The judgment states no wider legal principle.

The appellant’s asylum application was refused. His appeal on asylum and human-rights grounds was rejected. On reconsideration, it was held arguable that the immigration judge had erred in law, but the reconsideration found no error of law. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal with leave. After hearing the appellant’s argument, the court indicated its tentative view that the appeal should be dismissed, and the parties then consented to that order.

1. Disposition. Lord Justice Hooper recorded that the Court of Appeal’s tentative view was that the appeal had to be dismissed. With the consent of both parties, the appeal was dismissed.
2. The court therefore did not determine any wider question of asylum or human-rights law, nor did it develop a general test concerning errors of law by the tribunal.
3. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of £500.

• Asylum and Immigration Tribunal: The appellant’s asylum and human-rights appeal was rejected. On reconsideration, the tribunal found no error of law.
• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): The appeal was dismissed by consent after the court indicated its tentative view that it should be dismissed.