Shaheen v Secretary of State for the Home Department
The IAT did not commit an error of law in refusing to admit the Secretary of State's new evidence because the alleged mistake of fact was not uncontentious or objectively verifiable; the dispute remained contested and did not satisfy the criteria in E and R. The IAT was correct to dismiss the appeal as the requirements for admitting new evidence on appeal were not met.
- Parties
- Applicant/respondent: Shabana Shaheen; Respondent/appellant: The Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 November 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Immigration Appeal / Appeal From Immigration Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Asylum, Error of Law, Admission of New Evidence, Finality of Litigation, Mistake of Fact
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Shabana Shaheen
Applicant/respondent
The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Respondent/appellant
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Appeal From Immigration Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (IAT) committed an error of law in refusing to admit new evidence and dismissing the Secretary of State's appeal
- 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal and the applicable legal principles
Ratio Decidendi
The IAT did not commit an error of law in refusing to admit the Secretary of State's new evidence because the alleged mistake of fact was not uncontentious or objectively verifiable; the dispute remained contested and did not satisfy the criteria in E and R. The IAT was correct to dismiss the appeal as the requirements for admitting new evidence on appeal were not met.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal by the Secretary of State is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment