Home Office presents Google Hits, and Wins!

[transpondia-2011]

In case R (BT) v (1) SSHD & (2) Upper Tribunal (C4/1983/2011), the person was appealing an asylum claim on the grounds of being a lesbian. As evidence she produced medical reports of wounds inflicted to an intimate part of her body.

On the day of the hearing, the Home Office showed up with a Google search that had no hits to substantiate her claim. Based upon this, the Home Office set forth the position that her evidence was unreliable. What came next borders upon the UNREAL.

Incredible to relate, the judge dismissed the appeal on grounds of credibility. She lost!

On Monday, she received permission to launch a judicial review. So this story is still developing...

[MPH80]

What was the search they ran? Her name? Her wounds?

Saying a google search is unusable doesn't help unless you say what it was for.

If she was claiming a medical term and they used the google search to show it doesn't exist - that would seem reasonable to me.

[vinny]

Do provide a link to the case.

[transpondia-2011]

Hi Vinnie!! Glad you picked up on this. At the moment I am using case notes written by the instructed barrister (at Doughty Street Chambers); and the UT - to my knowledge - hasn't published anything yet. It's very new, like last week or so. You can use the case header to poll your searches for when something appears. Check the barrister's site for when it appears on their list of 'interesting cases'. But in all events, I'm tracking the case and will SHOUT anyway when the next thing occurs.

It's great to see you're interested in this one!