Appeal Number: PA/09774/2018 (LJ AND SSHD)

In this appeal the Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Juss noted Mr Masood’s submissions, found an error of law, allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the First-tier Tribunal. Mr Masood’s submissions were noted as follows:

“At the hearing before me on 3rd January 2018, Mr Masood, appearing on behalf of the Appellant, relied upon the fact that the Appellant was accepted as being a minority Ashraf clan member from Somalia. Secondly, he came from an area that was controlled by al-Shabaab. Third, he could not be returned to Somalia as a minority clan member and the case of MOJ [2014] UKUT 00442 makes clear why this is so, particularly as he has no close family members in Mogadishu. Fourth, he would not be able to get employment. Fifth, he would therefore end up living in an IDP camp and MOJ clearly states that the conditions in IDP camps are dire and violate basic fundamental human rights. Sixth, in relation to the Appellant’s Article 8 rights, which were based essentially on his relationship with his mother, the judge did not apply the Razgar principles properly. This was a case where the Appellant had been separated from his mother when he was just aged 8 years of age, at a time when a civil war was raging through Somalia, and it was not until a further 22 years, that he was then able to reunite himself with his mother in the United Kingdom. But by that time he was an adult, and the judge had failed to take these “exceptional circumstances” into account, and had failed to properly determine the fact that there were indeed more than normal emotional ties between the mother and son, on account of their history of separation and the way in which they had eventually been finally reunited.”

“In reply, Mr Masood submitted that the country guidance case of MOJ [2014] UKUT 00442 had not been followed. This is because paragraph 407(h) of that case lists a series of factors to be taken into account, which the judge had not gone through, and it was not enough to say that because the Appellant’s mother was supporting the Appellant in the United Kingdom, she could equally do so if he was returned back to Somalia, without consideration of the factors set out at paragraph 407(h).”

Read (here).