Rama, R (on the application of) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal & Anor

LORD JUSTICE BROOKE: This is an application for permission to apply for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal which refused permission to appeal from the determination of an adjudicator. It was dismissed because the appellant did not comply with an order of Master Gladwell, but she then applied for her application to be reinstated.

I received this morning a letter from the appellant asking for the matter to be adjourned. The documents that she sent with the papers could not be read and in these circumstances I consider that it would be wrong to adjourn the matter, particularly as she did not attend when she asked for an oral hearing before the High Court judge.

It is another case in which an adjudicator did not accept the appellant's case. There is a risk that she may face trial when she returns to Nepal, but the adjudicator did not believe many of the matters that the appellant told her. In those circumstances, the Immigration Appeal Tribunal were unable to identify any point of law to justify an appeal and the High Court judges in turn could see no point of law to justify judicial review.

So far as the appeal to this court is concerned, the appellant's notice of appeal is in very vague terms. I can see no point of law here to justify an appeal to this court. Both the present case and the case of Gurung, which I have just heard, are in my judgment totally without merit.

I therefore dismiss the application in Rama.