Hosted by www.ijjo.org

Chapter 12 | Appeals: Right to Appeal and Representation
an adjudicator as his or her determination would have
no precedent value).
67 R (on the Application of B) v. the London Borough of
Merton [2003] EWHC 1689.
54 In this case no question were raised about the possibility
of her being a victim of child trafficking.
55 As asylum seekers were not permitted to work at that
time, it is unlikely that she was refused Controlled
Legal Representation on her means. There is also substantial
objective evidence which indicates that former
child soldiers may be persecuted on return on account
of the atrocities they may have taken part in.
56 It was not possible to ascertain the grounds upon
which he had appealed from the determination of
his appeal.
57 Information provided by Simone Hugo and Nerissa
Steel, 2005.
58 Statistics provided by the Legal Services Commission.
59 Although asylum appeals take place in a tribunal setting,
the proceedings are adversarial and deal with complex
issues of law and fact and even adult asylum seekers
rarely succeed without proper legal representation.
60 See Immigration Contract documents issued by the
Legal Services Commission.
61 Firms of solicitors or not for profit organizations who
were contracted to supply representation at asylum
appeals.
62 From 2004, solicitors and case workers wishing to
practice in immigration and asylum law have been
required to obtain accreditation under a scheme set
up by the Law Society and the Legal Services Commission.
63 Solicitors who practice in Family Law and who have
been admitted to the Children’s Panel receive a 15%
uplift on their fees when representing a child.
64 Coker, Jane, Finch, Nadine, and Stanley, Alison. Legal
Action Group publication. 2002.
65 ILPA, November 2004, funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
Heaven Crawley with Gaenor Bruce, Jane Coker,
Nadine Finch, Susan Rowlands, Sue Shutter and Alison
Stanley.
66 Committee on the Rights of the Child: Concluding
Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland 09/10/2002.
68 Immigration Appellate Authority. Adjudicator Guidance
Note No. 8. Unaccompanied Children, April 2004,
para 3.4.
69 Information provided by a Senior Immigration Judge.
70 The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, which took
over responsibility for appeals on 4 April 2005, has
stated that it expects any separated child to be accompanied
to an appeal hearing by his or her social worker
and that it will adjourn hearings where they do not
appear with the child. It is too early to ascertain whether
this is being applied in practice or what happens if the
separated child has no allocated social worker.
71 The Hearing Centre at Wood Green in London.
72 Ibid, Endnote 68. This Guidance is now issued to all
Immigration Judges sitting in the new Asylum and
Immigration Tribunal, as is ILPA’s Working with children
and young people subject to immigration control:
Guidelines for best practice (November 2004).
73 This case related to age assessments carried out by
local authorities but its general principles can also
be applied at the appellate stage. Mr. Justice Stanley
Burnton held that: (1) a decision maker must not simply
accept the Home Office’s view of a child’s age; (2)
a decision maker must not just rely on the child’s
physical appearance; (3) a decision maker must elicit
the general background of the separated child, including
family circumstances and history, educational
achievements and activities pursued in the past few
years. Ethnic and cultural information may also be
useful; (4) if there was a reason to doubt the child’s
own statement, the decision maker will have to make
an assessment of his or her credibility by asking
questions designed to test his or her credibility; and
(5) the burden of proof lay with the separated child.
Hosted by www.ijjo.org
161