Majumder v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1)

Majumder v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Rev 1)

The Secretary of State failed to discharge the legal burden of proof that the respondents obtained their TOEIC certificates by dishonesty; the Upper Tribunal's assessment of the evidence, including the expert critique of the voice recognition process, was legitimate and not in error.

Parties
First Respondent/first Appellant: Sharif Ahmed Majumder; Second Respondent/second Appellant: Ihsan Qadir; Appellant/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Upper Tribunal (immigration and Asylum Chamber) / Appeal Dismissed by Consent Before Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed by consent
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Evidential Burden, Legal Burden, Deception in TOEIC Certificates, Voice Recognition Evidence, Judicial Review, Statutory Appeals
Immigration Law Administrative Law Burden of Proof Evidential Burden Legal Burden Deception in TOEIC Certificates Voice Recognition Evidence Judicial Review +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharif Ahmed Majumder

First Respondent/first Appellant

Ihsan Qadir

Second Respondent/second Appellant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Upper Tribunal (immigration and Asylum Chamber) / Appeal Dismissed by Consent Before Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State discharged the legal burden of proof to show TOEIC certificates were obtained by dishonesty
  2. 2 Whether the Upper Tribunal erred in its assessment of the Secretary of State's evidence and the respondents' English proficiency

Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of State failed to discharge the legal burden of proof that the respondents obtained their TOEIC certificates by dishonesty; the Upper Tribunal's assessment of the evidence, including the expert critique of the voice recognition process, was legitimate and not in error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed by consent

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed without determination of the merits
  • Secretary of State to pay respondents' costs