Allegations of misconduct by an Immigration Judge must be substantiated rules the Upper Tribunal

In order for a case to be appealed to the Upper Tribunal, the Immigration Judge in the First Tier Tribunal must have erred in law.  In the case of Azia (proof of misconduct by judge) Iraq [2012] UKUT 96 (IAC) a number of allegations concerning the Immigration Judge’s conduct were raised in appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The Tribunal stated that such allegations would be treated ‘with the greatest seriousness’ given the impact they could have in deciding to set aside a determination.

Notwithstanding, the Upper Tribunal stressed that allegations must be substantiated in fact and not simply made without supporting evidence.  It continued to point out that not substantiating claims 'is a particularly inappropriate way to attempt to establish grounds of appeal relating to the alleged misconduct or inappropriate conduct of a judge’.  The Tribunal was of the opinion that this was not something they would have to issue directions on as legal practitioners should already be aware of it.

It appears that in Azia the Upper Tribunal has handed down a short, sharp reminder to legal practitioners that, before they make allegations against Tribunal Judges, they should ensure they have their facts and evidence together first.