Egyptian national’s medical reports not engaged with in any substantive way in asylum decision

Judicial review – telescoped hearing – Egyptian national challenging the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse him refugee status – emigrated to Kuwait – converted to Shia Islam – interrogated by authorities about his conversion – claims that this interrogation was carried out at the behest of the Egyptian authorities – claims he was asked to become a spy on his fellow Egyptian Shia but that he refused - returned to Egypt to visit his family – remained for a month – on his return he was detained by the security services at Kuwait Airport – claimed that he was insulted and ill treated - deported back to Egypt - then detained and abused (including alleged sexual abuse) by the Egyptian authorities in four separate detentions – fears persecution also from Sunni Islam extremists in Egypt – claims that they threatened to kill him because he was a Shia Muslim - claims that the individual who issued the threat would have known his religious affiliation from information obtained from the intelligence services - number of adverse credibility findings - Tribunal's consideration of the SPIRASI report – argued that the Tribunal failed to conduct a rational analysis of the medical and psychological evidence - Tribunal failed to give reasons as to why the medical evidence was rejected - Tribunal Member erred in law in rejecting the medical report as not independent and erred in law and fact in failing to regard the report as independent evidence of torture - when holding against his credibility the fact that he had not disclosed his sexual abusive in his questionnaire or during his s.11 interview, the Tribunal failed to take into account the expert evidence contained in the SPIRASI report - the Istanbul Protocol - whether the report's findings merited a more expansive examination by the Tribunal Member as part of the assessment of credibility – Tribunal argued that the weight to be given to a SPIRASI report depends on the credibility of the applicant - approach of the courts to the question of the discretion of decision makers as to how to deal with medical evidence will depend on the particular circumstances of each case – principles for the courts to assess the manner in which the decision maker dealt with medical evidence.