The High Court quashed a decision refusing a Nigerian woman’s refugee appeal, finding that unclear reasoning about her past abuse prevented effective judicial review. It remitted the appeal to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal for fresh adjudication by a different member.
In a judgment delivered on 23 April 2010, Ms Justice M. Clark said the Tribunal decision did not make clear whether the applicant was found credible or whether past persecution or serious harm had been established. The court said that uncertainty limited its ability to assess the decision’s treatment of state protection and internal relocation.
The applicant had sought judicial review of a Tribunal decision affirming the Refugee Applications Commissioner’s recommendation that she should not receive refugee status. The Commissioner had described her account of sexual and physical abuse by her father and his associates as graphic and credible, but concluded the abuse did not amount to persecution under the 1951 Geneva Convention. On appeal, the Tribunal relied on the possibility of state protection in Nigeria and relocation to a large city such as Port Harcourt.
The applicant argued that the Tribunal had not properly assessed whether protection would be effective and accessible to her, given her personal circumstances and information about barriers facing rape survivors. She also argued that the internal relocation assessment was deficient. The respondents defended the state-protection finding and said any flaw in the relocation analysis could be severed.
Justice Clark said the Tribunal had focused on future risk through state protection and relocation without clearly addressing the applicant’s account of past harm. That omission mattered, the court said, because past persecution could be relevant under Regulation 5(2), and a clear credibility finding could affect later consideration of subsidiary protection or leave to remain. The court did not decide the applicant’s arguments on state protection or relocation.
The court ordered certiorari quashing the Tribunal decision and mandamus returning the appeal to the Tribunal for a fresh decision by a different member. It did not grant refugee status or determine the appeal’s eventual outcome.