Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

IMMIGRATION SGS 7 - REFUSAL OF ASYLUM AND ASYLUM APPEAL (Types of…

- - - - CLEARLY UNFOUNDED
        'NO MERIT' CASES
        
        PROCESS TO CERTIFICATION
        
        S.94(1) NIAA 2002; ex p Thangarasa; Yogathas
        
        Decision maker considers application.
        
        Application is refused.
        
        When taking into account the facts of the case and relevant country information, the application is so weak, that it is 'wholly without merit; bound to fail'.
        
        Applicant may still appeal against the refusal BUT cannot appeal from within the UK (NIAA s.92(2) and (3)).
        
        Is the applicant's application for asylum considered before certification?
        
        Yes :check:
        
        Following certification, can client appeal against refusal of asylum from within the UK?
        
        No :red_cross:
      - EUROPEAN ROUTE SAFE THIRD COUNTRY CASES
        
        (eg: France)
        
        PROCESS TO CERTIFICATION
        
        Dublin Convention; Dublin Convention II; A&i (Toc) etc Act 2004, Sched 3.
        
        If asylum applicant has travelled through an EU state on their journey to the UK (and therefore could have claimed asylum in that state instead of waiting to reach the UK), the application may be certified.
        
        In contrast to the clearly unfounded cases above, the decision maker need not consider the application (subject to certain considerations).
        
        Decision maker can require the applicant to leave the UK before their application has been fully considered.
        
        Following certification, can client appeal against refusal of asylum from within the UK?
        
        No :red_cross: (only option would be to attempt to JR the certification)
        
        Is the applicant's application for asylum considered before certification?
        
        No - it does not need to be fully considered before certification :red_cross:
        
        :warning:Note: this is different from the 'clearly unfounded designated safe countries' above
      - CLEARLY UNFOUNDED
        'DESIGNATED SAFE COUNTRIES' CASES
        
        PROCESS TO CERTIFICATION
        
        S.94(3) NIAA 2002; ZL and VL v SSHD
        
        Decision maker considers application.
        
        Application is refused.
        
        Decision maker considers: is applicant entitled to live in a country on the relevant list? NB - this is a different list to the third country cases list below.
        
        If yes, decision maker must consider guidance from ZL and VL v SSHD, and if the answers to the questions in that guidance are such that the claim cannot on any legitimate view succeed, then the claim is clearly unfounded: the UKVI must certify such claim as clearly unfounded (unless, following the ZL guidance, the UKVI is satisfied that the claim is not clearly unfounded.
        
        Following certification, can client appeal against refusal of asylum from within the UK?
        
        No :red_cross:
        
        Is the applicant's application for asylum considered before certification?
        
        Yes :check: