Mr Justice Swift
Sitting as a Judge of the Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
1
A declaration to this effect was at paragraph 2 of Fordham J’s Order. Strictly speaking, it was probably unnecessary for the declaration to apply to paragraph 17 of the Guidance Note as that paragraph said nothing as to the conduct of error of law hearings. However, nothing material turns on this point.
- Introduction
- Relevant Provisions
- “34. — Decision with or without a hearing
- Making Certain Appeal Decisions Without A Hearing
- The Tribunal’s power to set aside its own decisions
- Rule 34 Decisions and rule 43 “procedural irregularity”
- The Secretary of State’s submission
- The significance of the Guidance Note, per se
- The significance of reference (or lack of reference) to the Guidance Note or other matters.
- The significance of directions given by the Tribunal: pre-judgment of the rule 34 decision.
- in electronic form
- who considers that despite the forgoing directions a hearing is necessary
- The directions in paragraph 2 above must be complied with in every case.
- Consent; failure to comply with the direction permitting submission in opposition to the provisional view.
- Appearance of bias
- Final observations on generic matters
- Applying the rule 43(3) time limit; applications for an extension of time
- (HU/18412/2019)
- (PA/09206/2019)
- (PA/4768/2019)
- (HU/8693/2017)
- TO & BO (Nigeria)
- (HU/04826/2019 & HU/04831/2019)
- (HU/4735/2019)
- (10)
- (11)
- (12)
- (13)
- (14)
- (15)
- (HU/13731/2019)
- (17)
- (18)
- (PA/05994/2019)
- Disposal
- Mr Justice Swift