Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court grants judicial review of the decision to refuse refugee status to a Kosovar family, which claimed to fear persecution because the family was involved in a blood feud, on the grounds that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal erred in determining that the persecution which the Kosovar family’s feared did not have a Convention nexus and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal erred in finding that the Kosovar family did not constitute members of a particular social group
Judicial review – telescoped hearing – Kosovar family challenging the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse them refugee status - claimed fear of persecution based on a blood feud – father’s brother allegedly killed his brother-in-law – his brother can now not be found – as a male member of the family, he is now under threat from the murdered man’s family in retribution – claimed that the life of the son may be under threat, particularly when he reaches the age of majority – attempted mediation failed – claimed that the family lived in isolation - contended that the tribunal member failed to engage with important facts – argued that the Tribunal member failed to take into account relevant considerations and further took into account irrelevant considerations – whether there was a well founded fear of persecution – claimed that the Tribunal member’s negative credibility findings were peripheral to the core claim and based on conjecture – whether State protection was available to the family – whether the Kosovar family were members of a particular social group – complained that the mother was not afforded an oral hearing in breach of fair procedures – complained that there was no independent assessment of the children’s case.
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.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.