AKB and PB v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE DYSON,LORD JUSTICE WALLER |
| Judgment Date | 15 November 2005 |
| Neutral Citation | [2005] EWCA Civ 1493 |
| Date | 15 November 2005 |
| Docket Number | C5/05/1739 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
[2005] EWCA Civ 1493
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT
ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2
Lord Justice Waller
Lord Justice Dyson
C5/05/1739
DR SATVINDER JUSS (instructed by Messrs Riaz Khan, Richamore House, 7 Princess Street, Barnsley S70 1PR) appeared on behalf of the Applicants
These applicants seek permission to appeal against the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal who, on 3rd June 2005, on a reconsideration following remittal by the IAT, dismissed their appeals on both asylum and human rights grounds against the dismissal of their appeals against the decision of the adjudicator which had been promulgated on 10th January 2003.
The applicants are Albanian subjects. They are husband and wife. I will refer to the husband as 'PB' and the wife as 'AKB'. Their claims, which stood or fell together, were based on PB's former links with SHIK or SHIKU and the Democratic Party in Albania. AKB came to the United Kingdom in April 2002 and PB in September of that year. Their fear of return was based on his membership of the Democratic Party and his status as a board member and apparently also a member of the secret services.
The adjudicator's findings of fact were accepted and adopted by the AIT. They included the following. After the elections in 1997, when the Communist Party ousted the Democratic Party, PB and AKB were harassed, and on one occasion AKB was seriously ill-treated. Explosives were found outside their door and PB was shot while at work. An explosion damaged their house, but the police would not investigate. At the end of 1997 the family relocated internally. AKB went to her parents' home and PB to the home of his sister-in-law. The police called at AKB's parents' home and ill-treated her father. She joined her husband and they lived at PB's sister-in-law's home for four years without difficulty. In spring 2002 PB noticed strangers in the village. He sent AKB to the United Kingdom, and, as I have said, later that year he joined her in this country after a time spent hiding in the mountains.
The only fresh subjective evidence adduced on behalf of the applicants before the tribunal was a facsimile of a document allegedly obtained by PB's sister and sent via a neighbour's fax machine on 19th May 2005. The letter, headlined "Tirana" but with no date, included the following:
"Certificate
To certify that Mr PB … is a member of the Democratic Party of Albania and has taken part in all electoral campaigns organised by this party. After the return to power of members of the former Communist Party, activists of the Democratic Party have become the victims of harassment to the extent of losing their jobs and even politically motivated killings. … Today he is in England and his return to Albania would be impossible. His life would be in danger as the former Communist Party members are in power."
The tribunal said of that certificate that it added very little to what was otherwise known and was merely a recital of facts presumably provided by PB's sister.
Both AKB and PB gave oral evidence before the tribunal. They described how they left their home in Bajram Curr after Mr Haklaj, the ex-chief of a branch of the Democratic Party, came to their flat at the end of December 1997 informing them that their names were on a blacklist for killing. They went into hiding immediately. PB's family helped to maintain them whilst they were in hiding in the mountains. PB did not work, but he did take the first year of a law degree at the University of Tirana 2000 while he was still in hiding.
There was a good deal of objective evidence as to the state of affairs in Albania before the tribunal. This included the CIPU Country Report for April 2005, which indicated that the Democratic Party had participated in the national elections in 1997 and 2001. In 2001 it formed part of the Union for Victory Coalition, which jointly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ms K Green v Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust: 2501715/2021
...feels that such a breach has occurred no matter how genuinely this view is held (Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1493, [2005] ICR 481, CA). The question is whether, viewed objectively, the conduct is calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the tru......
-
Mrs J Madeley v Cambrian Group: 1309576/2020
...but it must contribute something to the breach even if relatively insignificant Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council (2005) EWCA Civ 1493. Further, there cannot be a series of last straws; once the contract is affirmed earlier repudiatory breaches cannot be revived by a subsequen......
-
Ms S Moorcroft v SHC Clemsfold Group Ltd: 2304931/2019
...objective approach, there has been no breach, then the employee's claim will fail (see Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1493, [2005] IRLR 4.5. Employment contracts contain an implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The parties to the contract will not, wi......
-
Mr B Hailu v The University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: 2205684/2019
...objective approach, there has been no breach then the employee's claim will fail (see Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1493, [2005] ICR 481, CA). The legal test entails looking at the circumstances objectively, i.e. from the perspective of a reasonable person ......