Np (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Mummery |
| Judgment Date | 02 February 2012 |
| Neutral Citation | [2012] EWCA Civ 214 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 02 February 2012 |
| Docket Number | Case No: C5/2011/2035 |
[2012] EWCA Civ 214
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
(IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER)
[AA/15708/2010]
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Mummery
Case No: C5/2011/2035
Mr S Chelvan (instructed by Messrs Scudamores) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
The Respondent did not appear and was not represented.
This is a renewed application for permission to appeal. The application is made by Mr Chelvan on behalf of the applicant. The decision which he wishes to appeal is the dismissal of the appeal by PN to the Upper Tribunal. That is dated 3 June 2011.
On 17 October 2011 Carnwath LJ dealt with the matter on the papers and refused permission for a second appeal. The requirement of the criteria for a second appeal is that the court must consider that the appeal would raise an important point of principle or practice or that there is some other compelling reason for the Court of Appeal to hear it. Carnwath LJ said, with one exception, the grounds raised no issue of arguably general importance to support a second appeal.
The point identified in paragraphs 20 to 22 of the skeleton relating to the internal relocation issue relies on taking out of context paragraph 17 of the judgment of Sedley LJ in Daoud v SSHD [2005] EWCA Civ 755. It is clear from paragraph 5 of that judgment the internal relocation point had been rejected by the adjudicator, though not on a matter of principle because there was no submission or evidence to support it.
On the renewed application Mr Chelvan has submitted an advocate's statement pursuant to paragraph 14.4a of the Practice Direction Part 52. That is dated 27 January 2012. He has made oral submissions identifying what he says is a point that satisfies the criteria for a second appeal. It is a procedural point which he says arises on the rules that apply in the Upper Tribunal. The particular rule in the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 is rule 24 which provides for response to a notice of appeal. He points out that the rule requires any response to be in writing and it requires it to state certain matters. The relevant matter is that it must state the grounds on which the respondent relies, including any grounds on which the respondent is...
To continue reading
Request your trial