M v Immigration Appeal Tribunal [2005] EWCA Civ 820 (15 June 2005)

M v Immigration Appeal Tribunal [2005] EWCA Civ 820 (15 June 2005)

The adjudicator's findings that the appellant could live discreetly and safely in another part of Kenya, away from his home area, without a well-founded fear of persecution, were adequately reasoned and supported by the evidence. There was no evidence that the appellant's fear extended beyond his family and the mob, and no evidence that discreet conduct was forced upon him. The application for permission to appeal has no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 820
Parties
Applicant/claimant: M; Respondent/defendant: Immigration Appeal Tribunal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (asylum/refugee Appeal) / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division)
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Asylum, Refugee Convention, Persecution Based on Sexual Orientation, Internal Relocation, Sufficiency of Protection
Immigration Law Human Rights Law Asylum Refugee Convention Persecution Based on Sexual Orientation Internal Relocation Sufficiency of Protection

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Applicant/claimant

Immigration Appeal Tribunal

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (asylum/refugee Appeal) / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal, Civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, a homosexual man from Kenya, has a well-founded fear of persecution if returned to Kenya
  2. 2 Whether internal relocation within Kenya would provide sufficient protection to the appellant
  3. 3 Whether requiring the appellant to live discreetly to avoid persecution is compatible with the Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator's findings that the appellant could live discreetly and safely in another part of Kenya, away from his home area, without a well-founded fear of persecution, were adequately reasoned and supported by the evidence. There was no evidence that the appellant's fear extended beyond his family and the mob, and no evidence that discreet conduct was forced upon him. The application for permission to appeal has no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • Detailed assessment of appellant's funds ordered