) and others
[2013] EWCA Civ 1276. The appeals against the decisions in HM2 were dismissed and although the court allowed the appeal against the decision in MK it rejected the arguments directed at the country guidance set out therein.
- Introduction
- Iraq
- ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- The Evidence – A Summary
- Written Evidence of Dr Fatah
- Oral Evidence of Dr Fatah
- MK (documents – relocation)
- Amnesty International
- Home Office Country Information
- UNHCR’s position paper
- Existing Country Guidance
- HF (
- ) and others
- The Submissions – A Summary
- Appellant’s skeleton argument
- Appellant’s oral submissions
- Respondent’s skeleton argument
- Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive
- Legal Framework
- MOJ & Ors (return to Mogadishu) Somalia
- Elgafaji v Staatssecretaris van Justitie
- Diakite v Commissaire general aux refugies
- Elgafaji
- Diakite,
- HM and others (Article 15(c) Iraq
- HM (Iraq)
- Article 15(c) - Discussion and Conclusions
- AK (Article 15(c)) Afghanistan
- Iraqi Kurdish Region (IKR)
- Erbil, Sulaymaniyah and Dahuk
- The Southern Governorates – Basra, Kerbala, Najaf, Muthana, Thi-Qar, Missan, Qadissiya and Wassit
- Baghdad City
- Internal relocation
- Legal Framework
- Januzi v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- AH (Sudan) & others (FC)
- Places of Return
- only
- HF (Iraq
- I accept, as Mr Fordham submits, that it would be necessary for the court to consider whether the appellants would be at risk on return if their return were feasible, but I do not accept that the Tribunal has to ask itself the hypothetical question of what would happen on return if that is simply not possible for one reason or another
- INDISCRIMINATE VIOLENCE IN IRAQ: ARTICLE 15(C) OF THE QUALIFICATION DIRECTIVE
- Secretary of State for the Home Department
- DOCUMENTATION AND FEASIBILITY OF RETURN (excluding IKR)
- HF (Iraq) and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- POSITION ON DOCUMENTATION WHERE RETURN IS FEASIBLE
- IRAQI KURDISH REGION
- F. EXISTING COUNTRY GUIDANCE DECISIONS
- The Appellant’s Case
- Documents before the Upper Tribunal