Upper Tribunal (Immigration and asylum chamber), 2023-09-01, JR-2022-LON-001513
| Appeal Number | JR-2022-LON-001513 |
| Hearing Date | 05 July 2023 |
| Date | 01 September 2023 |
| Published date | 04 September 2023 |
| Status | Unreported |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) |
Case No: JR-2022-LON-001513
Case No: JR-2022-LON-001513
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
(IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER)
Field House,
Breams Buildings
London, EC4A 1WR
4 and 5 July 2023
Before:
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE OWENS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:
THE KING
on the application of
GR
[Anonymity Direction Made]
Applicant
- and -
LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDON
Respondent
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr Donnchadh Greene
(instructed by Osbornes Law), for the applicant
Mr Lindsay Johnson
(instructed by London Borough of Croydon for the respondent
Hearing date: 4 and 5 July 2023
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
J U D G M E N T
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Judge Owens:
-
The applicant originally applied for a judicial review of the respondent’s decision made on 21 June 2022, that the applicant was not the age claimed. The applicant originally sought an order declaring the short form age assessment to be unlawful, quashing the assessment and an order for respondent to conduct a compliant assessment. In these judicial review proceedings, because of the chronology of events, by the time this Tribunal held the fact-finding hearing, the short form assessment had been withdrawn and a further age assessment had taken place.
-
My task in accordance with directions dated 4 October 2022 is to determine the applicant’s age and date of birth in order to determine whether he was under 18 at the time that he arrived in the UK.
-
The hearing took place on 4 and 5 July 2023 in person.
Chronology
-
The applicant is a national of Afghanistan who arrived in the United Kingdom on or about 11 October 2021. On his arrival in the UK, he was assessed as being an adult by the Home Office. It was believed that his appearance strongly suggested he was over 25 and he was assigned a date of birth of 26 March 1996. After quarantine, he was placed in accommodation for adult asylum seekers in the Croydon area. On 25 March 2022 the applicant’s immigration solicitors sent a copy of the applicant’s Taskira to the Home Office. The Taskira was issued on 31 May 2014 and said, based on physical appearance, that the bearer was 9 years old on that date. The applicant was then referred to the London Borough of Croydon by Refugee Council. The respondent did not respond. Following a pre-action letter, the respondent carried out an age assessment on 6 June 2022. A document dated 21 June 2022 confirmed that the conclusion of the age assessment was that the applicant was 25 years or older.
-
Following pre-action correspondence, a judicial review claim and an application for interim relief were filed on the applicant’s behalf on 2 August 2022. On 5 September 2022, Gavin Mansfield KC sitting as a DHCJ, granted permission to proceed and interim relief in the form of support and accommodation as a child under s20 Children Act 1989. The proceedings were by the same order transferred to the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) for there to be a fact-finding hearing relating to the precedent fact of age.
-
The applicant was moved to a temporary placement on 8 September 2022. On 12 September 2022 he was moved to a foster care placement in Upper Norwood.
-
On 21 September 2022 the respondent indicated that the previous assessment would be withdrawn and a full assessment carried out by the end of 2022.
-
On 4 October 2022 by way of directions the matter was set down for a fact-finding hearing to resolve the disputed issue of the applicant’s age and listed for a Case Management Hearing. At a Case Management Hearing on 23 January 2023, UTJ Mandalia approved a consent order setting out directions for the claim going forward which included a direction for both parties to submit their position statements in respect of the new age assessment and for the matter to be set down for a fact-finding hearing to resolve the disputed issue of the applicant’s age.
-
On 2 February 2023 the respondent completed a new assessment and informed the applicant that he was found to be 21 years old. The assessment was served on the applicant’s solicitors on 6 February 2023.
Procedural History
-
The Upper Tribunal issued directions for the future conduct of this case as noted above.
-
There were various further orders extending time for the service of documents. On 15 June 2023 the applicant served his skeleton argument. On 4 July 2023 the respondent filed and served its position statement with an application to extend time. The reason provided for the late service was because the respondent was considering settling the matter. I extended time because the applicant was not prejudiced by the late service and because the skeleton argument was necessary to determine the application.
The Applicant’s Case
-
The applicant is a citizen of Afghanistan born in Tora Kala in the Tagab district of the Kapisa province of Afghanistan. He speaks Pashto. He does not know his date of birth or his exact age. Growing up he lived with his mother, father and five siblings in a mud dwelling. His father was a farmer growing pomegranates, wheat, corn and radish. He helped his father on the farm. His mother was a housewife. He attended school for 6 years in Afghanistan, but his education was intermittent due to the instability in his area. He is not fully literate in Pashto. His father has passed away. He claims that his brother was abducted by the Taliban in 2021 and died about three months later. His brother’s body was returned to the family by the Red Cross. He then claims to have been threatened by the Taliban and left Afghanistan.
-
He had a traumatic six-month journey to the UK. He crossed from Afghanistan into Iran and then travelled onto Turkey. There were several attempts to enter Turkey in the boot of a car and he was badly beaten by the Turkish authorities. When he did enter Turkey, he was made to stay in a basement with many other people with little food. He then crossed to Greece in a boat before travelling to Austria via Serbia, Macedonia and Hungary on foot. He describes a harrowing journey when he often did not have enough to eat and was tired. He was also beaten in other places. He gave evidence that he was beaten in Hungary. He was apprehended in Austria where he was kept in a camp for about two weeks. He then travelled onto France via Switzerland. In France he was living outdoors. He made several attempts to cross to the UK before he eventually boarding a dinghy with about 40 other men. At some point the boat he was in started breaking up. He was rescued by the coastguard and taken to Dover. He thought he was going to die. He has a problem in his genital area which he attributes to being beaten in Turkey for which he has received scans.
-
The applicant maintains that he was nine years old when his Taskira was issued on 10/03/1384 in the Afghan calendar which converts to 31 May 2014 in the Gregorian calendar. He says he was 16 years old on his arrival in the UK and 17 years old when he was referred to London Borough of Croydon and at the date of the initial age assessment in June 2022. He states that he took a photograph of his Taskira on his mobile phone before leaving Afghanistan. He sent a copy of the document to a migrant he was travelling with and after he lost his phone and was provided with a new phone the photograph of the document was sent back to him. He had a copy of the document on his phone on his arrival in the UK. He maintains that he is at risk on return to Afghanistan. He says that he has consistently told the truth about his Taskira and has given an accurate and truthful account of how and why he left Afghanistan, and his journey to the United Kingdom.
The Respondent’s Case
-
The respondent’s case is that the applicant is older than he has stated. The Taskira was sent to him later from Afghanistan and he did not have it on his phone when he arrived. His account is not credible. In any event the applicant does not know his date of birth.
-
The respondent relies on the second full age assessment decision. The assessors’ view is that the applicant appears older than 18. They noted in particular the applicant’s thick eyebrows, stubble, defined Adam’s apple and triangular face shape. The assessors took into account the applicant’s alleged reluctance to show them a copy of the Taskira on his phone, his failure to show it to immigration officers on arrival, and the appearance of the Taskira itself. They gave weight to discrepancies between the applicant’s stated date of birth, inconsistencies in information he shared in his previous assessment about his family composition and his journey from Afghanistan to the UK, as well as a perceived reluctance to answer questions and a perceived withholding of information. They also took into account his failure to disclose the injury to his genitals.
The Hearing
At the outset of the hearing, I checked that the applicant understood the interpreter who was speaking Pashto and I explained to him what was going to happen. I proceeded on the basis that he is a vulnerable witness because he grew up in a...
To continue reading
Request your trial