During the Public Bill Committee debate on the Immigration Bill 2015/16 on 5 November 2015, the Minister for Immigration stated: “many appeals are allowed…or remitted, because the appellant provides the necessary evidence of their eligibility at a later stage (than the Home Office decision).”
From September 2014 to August 2015 the Tribunal received 2,067 appeals against a refusal of Home Office support. 62% of these were either allowed (44%), remitted or withdrawn by the Home Office.
Asylum Support Appeals Project (ASAP) disputes the suggestion that ‘late’ evidence is the sole reason for the consistently high rate of allowed and remitted appeals. As a result, they reviewed 50 client files from October and November 2015 to examine why those appeals were successful and explore the extent to which ‘late’ evidence was provided and influenced their outcome.
The main findings are:
- In only 30% (15 cases) of the sample was ‘late’ written evidence the sole or dominant factor in a successful appeal.
- In 44% (22 cases) of the sample the Tribunal cited a combination of factors in support of its decision to allow or remit the appeal.
- 36 successful appellants (72%) would not have a right of appeal under the proposed bill.
- In 42% (21 cases) of the sample the Home Office case was flawed due to a legal or factual issue, or rejected by the Tribunal.
Read the full report here: ASAP Research Briefing – Why Appeals Succeed Jan 2016