Refusal of support under Section 95 on the grounds that the appellant was not an asylum seeker. The respondent held that, as the appellant had returned to Iraq voluntarily, his application for asylum on return to the UK was to be classed as further representations: he was failed asylum seeker entitled, if at all, to support under Section 4. Tribunal held (i) that the appellant was an asylum seeker following confirmation in writing from the Home Office that they had recorded his application on his return to the UK as one for asylum and (ii) that the burden was on the applicant to demonstrate that he had made a claim for asylum; the burden was on the respondent to demonstrate that that application was no longer under consideration.
Read the full decision in
Published 8 February 2017