VT v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

There is no general duty to investigate documents produced in support of a protection claim. An inquiry may exceptionally be necessary where the document is central to the claim and a simple process will conclusively resolve its authenticity and reliability. Documentary evidence must nevertheless be assessed holistically.

Procedures Directive Article 22 imposes confidentiality throughout the examination of a protection claim, including appeals. Direct contact with an alleged persecutor is prohibited where its manner may reveal that protection has been sought or create additional risk. Written consent is ordinarily required for country-of-origin inquiries. A breach does not itself establish refugee status, but may affect the assessment of risk on return.

The appellant, a Sri Lankan national, claimed asylum on the basis that his associations with family members linked to the LTTE had led to detention, ill-treatment, bail and an arrest warrant. He relied principally on purported certified court records, an arrest warrant and letters from Sri Lankan attorneys and a court registrar.

Earlier decisions of the First-tier Tribunal had been set aside for legal error. The appeal was remade in the Upper Tribunal. The respondent relied on verification inquiries made through the British High Commission, including an inquiry to the Terrorist Investigation Division and inquiries at the Colombo Chief Magistrate Court.

The central issues were the permissible scope of document-authentication inquiries, the effect of Procedures Directive Article 22, and whether the evidence established a real risk on return.

1. Appeal dismissed. The appellant had not established, even to the applicable low standard, that his account was credible or that he faced a real risk on return.

2. There is no general obligation to authenticate documents produced in a protection claim. The claimant bears the overall burden of proof, while the examiner must assess all relevant material. Documents are not assessed in isolation. An inquiry may be required only in the exceptional situation where a document is central to the claim and a simple inquiry will conclusively resolve its authenticity and reliability.

3. Article 22 of the Procedures Directive applies throughout the examination of a protection claim, including appellate and judicial-review proceedings. Its two prohibitions distinguish disclosure to an alleged persecutor from obtaining information from that actor. Direct contact is prohibited if its manner may lead the actor to infer that an individual is likely to have made a protection claim, or may create additional risk. A precautionary approach requires consideration of necessity, safer alternatives, written consent and minimisation of personal disclosure.

4. The British High Commission's redaction of the appellant's name did not sufficiently protect a person with a genuine warrant. The warrant reference enabled the Terrorist Investigation Division to identify the subject, and the immigration context could lead it to infer a protection claim. The routine inquiry to that alleged actor was therefore prohibited by Article 22 and its response was given little weight.

5. A breach of Article 22 does not automatically require recognition as a refugee. It may be relevant to risk, but status depends on whether the evidence establishes a well-founded fear of persecution. Here, independent inquiries at the Chief Magistrate Court did not involve direct contact with an alleged persecutor and seriously undermined the warrant and related documents. The court evidence, together with other credibility concerns, left insufficient room for uncertainty.

• Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber): The earlier First-tier Tribunal decision of 16 March 2015 was set aside for legal error on 23 July 2015, and the appeal was directed to be remade in the Upper Tribunal.
• First-tier Tribunal: The appeal had first been dismissed on 3 February 2015. That decision was set aside for legal error and remitted for a fresh hearing on 27 February 2015.