or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court refuses judicial review of the decision refusing Bangladeshi national international protection, on the grounds that: the International Protection Appeals Tribunal's adverse credibility findings were lawful; the tribunal considered all relevant documents; and it lawfully considered the medical documentation.
Asylum and immigration – judicial review – Bangladeshi national challenging decision refusing him international protection – lived in the UK – never claimed international protection – refused renewal of student permission - came to the State and applied for international protection – illegible document - application refused – core credibility issues - inappropriateness of legalistic over-analysis of decisions - any administrative decision enjoys a presumption of validity and should be read in a manner that renders it valid rather than invalid - medical reports - benefit of the doubt - tribunal did not apply the incorrect test - report of a local village chairman - complaint that the document was not considered falls flat because it is clear from the terms of the decision that it was considered - no lack of reasons - impossibility, and therefore an absurdity, to require a decision maker to make a final assessment on the reliability of a document prior to considering the reliability of the person producing it - lack of credibility – adverse credibility decision is not irrational or unlawful - treatment of medical report of February 2017 - failure to lawfully consider the medical documentation - unreality to the legalistic point made - tribunal did not err in law or in fact in calling the medical documentation not material - a medical report can establish that an account could be true, but it does not establish who caused the injury or in what circumstances - alleged error in failing to state which medical report is unreliable where his credibility was condemned - allegation that the tribunal acted unlawfully in failing to advert to country information - lack of narrative consideration is not a lack of lawful consideration – judicial review refused
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.