Login Join Us
A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report

A court cannot ignore an unchallenged expert report

The High Court found that the Crown Court was bound to accept an uncontested expert report if it did not have a valid reasons for departing from the...
Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation

Expert Witness Survey - Equal Representation

Take 5 minutes to help monitor progress
Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance... Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance...

Appeal in the Cause Michael Marshall against Berkshire Hathaway International Insurance...

The sheriff appeal court upheld the sheriff's award of damages for injuries sustained in a vehicle accident which were assessed, in the...
A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and... A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

EWI Honorary Fellow Tony Saggers has been a drug trafficking Expert Witness since 1995, alongside a career in law enforcement that spanned 30 years....
Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

News

T.U. -v- International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor
Sean Mosby
/ Categories: Case Updates

T.U. -v- International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor

The Case

The applicant had applied for international protection in Ireland due to a risk to his safety in his home country of Nigeria. He was seeking from the High Court of Ireland certiorari (i.e. judicial review) of the decision by the Irish International Protection Appeals Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) refusing him such protection.

 

One ground for the applicant’s appeal was that, when he showed the Tribunal the marks and scarring on his body which he alleged were caused by beatings, the Tribunal should have adjourned the hearing, in pursuance of its duty to cooperate with the applicant’s application, to enable him to obtain a medical report dealing with these injuries.

 

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Previous Article Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice
Next Article Aston Risk Management Ltd v Lee Jones & Ors [2024] EWHC 252 (Ch)
Print
296
Comments are only visible to subscribers.