- BY Colin Yeo
Refugee appeals against revocation of refugee status should be dismissed if appellant not a refugee
THANKS FOR READING
Older content is locked
A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more
TAKE FREE MOVEMENT FURTHER
By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;
- Single login for personal use
- FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
- Access to all Free Movement blog content
- Access to all our online training materials
- Access to our busy forums
- Downloadable CPD certificates
This is probably a determination best ignored, from the judge who brought us Sala. The headnote reads:
1. An appeal under s 82(1)(c) is an appeal against revocation of the basis upon which the leave referred to in s 82(2)(c) was granted.
2. The only allowable ground under s 84(3)(a) is by reference to the Refugee Convention, and by s 86(2)(a) that matter must therefore be determined in all cases.
3. Where s 72(10) applies, however, the appeal must be dismissed even if the ground is made out.
Whatever.
The determination basically consists of an obscure legal discussion in which even I could find no interest and concludes, I think, that an appeal on refugee grounds against revocation of refugee status should be dismissed if the appellant is excluded from the protection of the refugee convention. The case is Essa (Revocation of protection status appeals) [2018] UKUT 244 (IAC).
Interested in refugee law? You might like Colin's book, imaginatively called "Refugee Law" and published by Bristol University Press.
Communicating important legal concepts in an approachable way, this is an essential guide for students, lawyers and non-specialists alike.
SHARE
