Existing Country Guidance
45. The core of the current country guidance relating to the circumstances in Iraq dates back to the decision in
- 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