"I am deeply grateful for Dr. S Chelvan’s exceptional guidance and support during my case. His passion for human rights and dedication to humanity were evident throughout my journey. He treats every client with fairness and respect, regardless of background or status, valuing honesty and hard work above all. Courageous, principled, compassionate, dedicated, he always reminded me "Knowledge is power" "Thank you, Dr. Chelvan for your unwavering support and for making a meaningful difference."
Z, Gay Pakistani Student, Direct Public Access Client, March 2026 Home Office Grant of Refugee Status following Interview.
Practice Focus: While renowned for his LGBT+ asylum work from initial applications or appeals before the First-tier Tribunal, to applications or interventions before the European Court of Human Rights, Dr Chelvan’s practice focuses broadly on highly complex deportation cases, human rights challenges (including family and private life), and procedure via statutory appeal or judicial review, either as sole counsel, or as case leader . He additionally provides expert opinions on immigration and asylum law in complex family law matters. His Public Access practice includes asylum, immigration, nationality and fresh claim applications. In December 2024, Dr Chelvan was profiled as The Times Lawyer of the Week for his role as Leading Counsel for two gay and refugee charities in their intervention in MI v Switzerland Dr Chelvan is currently instructed in four very complex criminal deportation cases either before the First-tier Tribunal or Upper Tribunal, and an application before the European Court of Human Rights.
Having practiced in the field of LGBT+ ("Queer") refugee and human rights law since 2001, Chelvan has been recognised as the leading legal expert by the UK’s Legal Directories since 2006, spearheading some of the leading cases since 2005 (Tier 1 in Immigration Legal 500 since 2017). Since 2010, Chelvan has been consulted as an internationally recognised expert by the United Nations, the IOM, national governmental departments, lawyers and NGOs.
Chelvan's Difference, Stigma, Shame and Harm (‘DSSH’) model, was created by Chelvan in 2011 as a positive tool to determine an LGBT+ asylum claim. The model is used globally, and has been endorsed by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees since 2012 [62], EASO, the IOM, the IARLJ and used by various governments, including the UK’s Home Office since 2015 (see CREDO2, 2015, Chapter XI). Newsweek Europe in 2014 described the model as ‘a simple starting point that cuts across borders’.
In supporting his 2018 Attitude Magazine Pride award, the Nigerian lesbian activist Aderonke Apata, who successfully gained asylum after a 13 year battle after Chelvan was instructed, commented, ‘the way that he fought .. and they [the Home Office] gave me asylum, that’s magical to me’. Danila Stepin, another of Chelvan’s clients who feared persecution in Russia said, ‘Chelvan is really an admirable man, he saves peoples lives’.
In October 2019, Chelvan was appointed by the Independent Advisory Group on Country Information ('IAGCI') as the Independent Reviewer on Home Office Country of Information Report on Sexual orientation and Gender identity or Expression. His 400 page review of 31 COI reports was filed on 10 February 2020, and reviewed by the IAGCI on 31 March 2020. The Independent Chief Inspector on Borders and Immigration filed his report addressing the review and its recommendations on 13 October 2020. Both the ICI report (with Chelvan's report at Annex C), and the Home Office's response to the report, were published on 8 December 2020. Out of Chelvan's 10 recommendations, the Home Office fully accepted six, and partially accepted two (see pages 6 to 7 of main report).
For over 20 years Chelvan has delivered lectures and training on a wide range of topics linked to refugees and migration. In 2026, Chelvan delivered a keynote speech in Sweden on the Misapplication of the DSSH Model at the May 2026 Uppsala University 'LGBTQ Refugees in the Welfare State: Research, policy and practitioners in dialogue', and will be part of the immigration panel for the Inaugural ELLA (European LGBTQ+ Lawyers' Association) Conference held in London on 17-18 September 2026. On 4 November, he will be delivering a keynote speech on LGBTQ+ Refugees at the 'Queer World International Conference' ('Intersectionality and Migration') this year held in Oslo, Norway, and training Norwegian asylum decision-makers on 5 November 2026. Chelvan has additionally accepted an invitation from the Swiss Department of Justice to provide further training in 2027, having previous provided training for Swiss asylum decision-makers in March 2016 (date tbc).
From 2025, points of law arising in cases Chelvan has been instructed on have contributed to the UK government lobbying to amend Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights ('ECHR'), and His Majesty’s Opposition party committing to leaving the ECHR (Secretary of State for the Home Department v RC ('the Zimbabwe' case)).
Key Cases:
A: EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS:
MI v Switzerland 12 NOVEMBER 2024 (COMMUNICATED AS FINAL JUDGMENT 14 FEBRUARY 2025):
JUDGMENT - GRANTED APPLICATION ON ARTICLE 3 ECHR GROUNDS -REAL-RISK TO GAY MAN FROM IRAN - PROCEDURAL APPROACH OF SWISS GOVERNMENT (ARTICLES 8, 13, AND 14 ECHR) WAS NOT SUBSTANTIVELY ADDRESSED
(INSTRUCTED ON BEHALF OF INTERVENORS - Leading Haydee Dijkstal)
Application: (M.I v Switzerland -Application no.56390/21) .(21 October 2022 written submissions (Intervenor)
African Rainbow Family and Stonewall were the UK-based gay and refugee charities who were granted permission to intervene.
Jaqueline McKenzie, Partner and Head of Immigration at Leigh Day and Co, instructed Dr S Chelvan, Head of Immigration and Public Law, leading Haydee Dijkstal, Head of International Law, to draft the intervention submissions. Dr Chelvan’s pupil (2022-23), Holly Armstrong, assisted.
The Times Lawyer of the Week (12 December 2024) "S Chelvan on acting for gay and refugee charities"
H.A. v the United Kingdom (Application no. 30919/20) - Leading Haydee Dijstal, Head of International Law.
5 DECEMBER 2023 - ARTICLE 3 ECHR FUTURE RISK TO PALESTINIAN REFUGEE FROM LEBANON
UNRWA REFUGEE CAMP - ACCEPTED RISK OF FORCED RECRUITMENT FROM EXTREMIST ARMED GROUPS (Judgment - 5 December 2023: Admissibility Granted, No Violation of Article 3 ECHR - only one of two judgments in 2023 where the United Kingdom was the respondent Convention party state).
Stateless Palestinian refugee from UNRWA camp in Lebanon – whether domestic Courts in refusing asylum under Article 1D of the 1951 Refugee Convention erred in not addressing future risk on return under Article 3 ECHR. Case communicated to the UK on 28 October 2020, published on 16 November 2020, UK Observations by 25 May 2021, and Applicant Reply to UK Observations lodged on 9 August 2021 (instructed by Vanessa Delgado, Duncan Lewis Solicitors).
Led Aqsa Hussain for written application stage (July 2020).
SEXUAL IDENTITY ASYLUM CLAIMS (Lead Counsel for Interventions for International Human Rights Non-Governmental NGOs):
(2014) A.E v Finland (Application no: 30953/11) (Instructed as sole Counsel by ECRE, FHRL, FIDH, ILGA-Europe) co-ordinated joint submissions with AIRE Centre/INTERIGHTS/UKLGIG - gay man from Iran (written comments submitted on 19 March 2014, proceedings struck out on the 22nd of September 2015 following positive grant of refugee status by Finland).
(2013) M. E. v SWEDEN, (application no. 71398/12) (written comments dated 9 April 2013 and December 2013). Instructed by FIDH (Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme), ICJ (International Commission of Jurists) and ILGA-Europe (European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association).
Case of gay man from Libya challenging expulsion from Sweden. First case to substantively address risk to gay applicants since earlier 2004 Strasbourg decisions - “Article 3 of the Convention does not permit a Council of Europe member state to expel (even temporarily) a gay man who is genuinely married to a man, or a lesbian who is genuinely married to a woman, if the expelled individual would face a real risk of treatment violating Article 3 in their country of origin if they were to speak publicly (or otherwise be open) about their sexual orientation and their same-sex marriage. The genuineness of the marriage can be determined in the Council of Europe member state, without expelling the individual to their country of origin” [Section 26 of written comments]. Proceedings before the Grand Chamber struck out following positive grant of refugee status by Sweden on 8 April 2015. The only Strasbourg judgment to actually find an article 3 ECHR real risk on return in an asylum claim based on sexual identity is the 17 November 2020 judgment in B and C v Switzerland (gay man from the Gambia).
B: SUPREME COURT
FAMILY & ASYLUM LAW:
Interplay between Family Court (Hague convention child abduction cases) and Asylum law (Refugee claims):
G v G [2021] UKSC 9 (19 March 2021) and G (A Child : Child Abduction) [2020] EWCA Civ 1185 (15 September 2020) – instructed as asylum expert for Southall Black Sisters (Fourth intervenor, written submissions only). Protection claim made on entry to the UK by South African lesbian abducting mother with child as dependant. Returning father applies for return of child to South Africa pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention. Procedure and practice guidance provided by the Court of Appeal. Supreme Court allowed ground of appeal affirming a dependent child is an applicant for asylum, where objectively the raise a claim for asylum and therefore the application and/or appeal acts as a bar to removal and implementation of the Hague return order (consistent position of SBS before the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court). See the news article on SBS website (29 March 2021). Instructed by Janet Broadley of Goodman Ray Solicitors, with Charlotte Baker and led by Sam King QC (CoA), and Alex Verdan QC (SCt) (written submissions only).
C: COURT OF APPEAL:
SEXUAL IDENTITY ASYLUM CLAIMS:
Secretary of State for the Home Department v. PG [2025] EWCA Civ. 133 LJJ Bean, Asplin and Baker (Vice-President KBD) Leading Simon Ridding. Home Office appeal against Upper Tribunal Determination ( PG ) allowing deportation appeal on Article 3 ECHR grounds allowed, by way of remittal back to the Upper Tribunal.
LC (Albania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ. 351; [2017] 1 W.L.R 4173
(permission granted by Lindblom LJ on 20th October 2016 following 2 earlier adjourned hearings before Lindblom LJ (25 November 2015) and King LJ in February 2016)).
Leading Jessica Smeaton. 2 grounds of appeal (1) FTT and UT’s reliance on Country Guidance case of MK (lesbians) Albania [2009] UKAIT 00036 unlawful as set aside by Consent by the Court of Appeal Order in September 2011; and (2) Conduct on return no longer to be followed following MSM (Somalia) [2015] UKUT 00413 and/or contrary to EU law (2004 Minimum Standards Qualification Directive – discretion is not a standard contained in the Directive and is clearly not a more favourable standard) – HJ (Iran) was accordingly wrongly decided. Following DD (see below) – SSHD concedes the first ground of appeal. CA dismissed second ground of appeal finding HJ (Iran) is compatible with the Directive. Case attracted international media attention – see the Guardian, and Pink News.
R (Apata) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ. 802
Challenge to assessment of actual and/or imputed sexual identity of lesbian internationally recognised activist from Nigeria. Appeal dismissed as material should have been submitted as a fresh claim. Court of Appeal in this unusual case granted a stay on removal pending submission of fresh claim to the Respondent by early August 2016 (including a DSSH model statement). Respondent subsequently treats material as a fresh claim and grants the Appellant an in-country right of appeal. On 1 August 2017, following notification 11 witnesses will be attending hearing to support appellant’s evidence she is a lesbian (including Baroness Barker and Peter Tatchell), the SSHD grants the appellant refugee status 13 year battle for status – see article in The Guardian. Chelvan has contributed a chapter on this case in the forthcoming book "The Queer Outside in Law" (eds. Senthoran Raj and Peter Dunne, "Chapter Four: Aderonke Apata: the Voice of the Silenced", 11 February 2021).
SB (India) and CB (India) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ. 451; [2016] 4 W.L.R. 103; [2016] 2 F.C.R. 221; Times 25 May 2016
Moore-Bick, Gloster and Richards LJJ (permission granted by Elias LJ [2014] EWCA Civ. 501 - on 26 March 2014) – Flagrant breach of Article 8 (family life rights) ECHR to remove a married lesbian couple to India where there is no legal recognition and protection of same-sex unions. In first case in a decade to address same-sex relationships in the immigration context, the Court of Appeal recognised the development of Strasbourg jurisprudence recognising right to legal recognition and protection of same-sex couples within Article 8 ECHR (family life) (see Schalk and Kopf (2010) and Oliari (2015)). Appeal dismissed due to lack of flagrant breach. (Junior Victoria Hutton following grant of permission - Public Access and CFA agreement). Case attracted national and international media attention, e.g. articles in The Guardian, Pink News; and The Times of India. Negative findings of fact by the Court of Appeal in 2016 displaced by approach of the Indian Supreme Court on 6 September 2018 in Johar and ors v India. The Delihi High Court are to hear a case on right to same-sex marriage in India in January 2021. The Indian Supreme Court on 17 October 2023 (Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty and anor) dismissed the 'queer marriage' case, but did list the number of fundamental rights denied to same-sex couples due to lack of legal recognition of same-sex relationships. The judgment of the Indian Supreme Court is currently awaiting permission to petition (November 2023)
REVOCATION OF REFUGEE STATUS:
RY (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWCA Civ. 81
Two points of law (1) Excluding from refugee status without proceeding via the Immigration rules and cessation; and (2) Negative finding on rehabilitation when having passed rehabilitation criteria pursuant to statutory guidance (Road Traffics Act). Dismissed on both grounds. Instructed a week prior to the substantive hearing.
INTERNAL RELOCATION:
MS (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ. 7
Court of Appeal introduces ‘new test’ for internal relocation alternative, by focussing on lack of risk in place of relocation to be dispositive of asylum claim in circumstances where the Court finds no finding of fact with respect to risk in home area, contrary to what had been the position of both parties to the litigation and the accepted approach prior to this judgment.
COUNTRY POLICY:
GN (South Africa) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 1930 (17th December 2012) – White Gay Man from South Africa - following permission hearing, asylum appeal allowed by Consent in 2013 (see Annex E of 2020 report, pages 428 to 436). Same legal pathway adopted for a successful appeal before the First-tier Tribunal in 2017 (with full costs against the SSHD).
White gay man from South Africa, granted permission to appeal by Laws LJ against Upper Tribunal determination which dismissed his asylum claim, on the basis of effective state protection in South Africa. Upper Tribunal was not provided by the SSHD, prior to the promulgation of the determination, a copy of her own Operational Guidance Note of February 2012, which conceded that there is a lack of effective state protection in South Africa. Permission granted on the basis that it was arguable that the SSHD had a duty to disclose this document to the Upper Tribunal which undermined the basis of her appeal. Appellant successful on asylum and human rights grounds before First-tier Tribunal (IAC) as per HJ/HT Supreme Court guidelines. Chelvan instructed following Upper Tribunal determination.
INTERNAL RELOCATION:
NP (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ. 906
The lack of reference to internal relocation in a refusal letter refusing asylum, and/or the lack of reliance on internal relocation either at the First-tier Tribunal (IAC) or in a Rule 24 response to grounds of appeal to the Upper Tribunal, or in written submissions pursuant to specific directions, do not prevent the Upper Tribunal (IAC) from addressing this ground of appeal at a hearing. Article 8 (2) of the 2004 Qualification Directive (internal relocation, if relied upon, to be addressed in the decision on the asylum application), and the SSHD’s published Asylum Policy Instruction on Internal Relocation (internal relocation to be raised as a ground in the refusal letter), do not aid the Appellant. Only where there is an unfairness to the opposing party, should there be an adjournment granted, preventing a procedural unfairness. There is no lack of jurisdiction.
DISCRIMINATION AMOUNTING TO PERSECUTION:
OO (Sudan) and JM (Uganda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ. 1432; [2010] All ER (D) 17 Jun.
Definition of persecution does not arise from unenforced criminal legislation relating to same-sex conduct. However, SSHD concedes that article 8 ECHR violations may amount to persecution [21]. Concession relied on as a gateway into Human Rights prism for Refugee Convention status determination.
SEXUAL IDENTITY CLAIMS:
NR (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 856, [2009] INLR 169
Appeal allowed on basis that sexual identity is current sexual identity, and is not predicated on teenage sexual experimentation. Concessions relating to risk in Jamaica, and then acceptance of lesbian sexual identity, which were made, and then subsequently withdrawn by the SSHD were lawfully withdrawn. Appeal allowed on remittal to Upper Tribunal (IAC) finding that NR is ‘exclusively’ a lesbian and there is a real risk of persecution to her in Jamaica even on the basis of a perceived sexual identity- August 2010. Point of law incorporated into SSHD’s Asylum Policy Instruction on Sexual Orientation Issues in the Asylum Claim (2010, updated 2011). Case attracted Press attention in both the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph
HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) v SSHD [2009] EWCA Civ 172; [2009] Imm A.R. 600
Led by Raza Hussain for HT (challenge to Tribunal’s finding that discretion will be reasonably tolerable where there had been a positive finding of past-persecution by state and non-state agents on the grounds of sexual identity as a gay man). This ‘reasonable tolerability’ test was over-turned by the Supreme Court - HJ (Iran) [2010] UKSC 31; [2011] 1 AC 596 - instructed by HT (Cameroon) to deal with national and international media enquiries following judgment – HT granted refugee status in November 2010.
RG (Colombia) v SSHD [2006] EWCA Civ 57; [2006] Imm AR 297
Finding that as the Appellant had been able to be discrete without coming to the attention of vigilante death squads whilst in Colombia, the Tribunal’s finding that he can be returned to Colombia was not unlawful – successful fresh claim litigation followed judgment, abandoned before Upper Tribunal only due to grant by SSHD of ILR under legacy in 2011, following indication by UT that would succeed in his article 8 ECHR appeal. Court of Appeal judgment referred to as a ‘troubling case’ by Counsel for HJ (Iran) in 2010 proceedings before the Supreme Court. Instructed as Sole Counsel.
D: HIGH COURT (FAMILY DIVISION AND ADMINISTRATIVE COURT):
Interplay between Family Court (Hague convention child abduction cases) and Asylum law (Refugee claims):
K (A Child) (Stay of Return Order: Asylum Application) (Contact to a Parent in Self-Isolation) [2020] EWHC 2394 (Fam) (4 September 2020) asylum claim made after exhaustion of Hague proceedings and just prior to enforcement of return order prevents removal. Instructed on behalf of returning mother to the Russian Federation with respect to issues relating to asylum.
R (otao SB (Uganda)) v SSHD [2010] EWHC 338 (Admin) (Hickinbottom J)
Successful judicial review of refusal of fresh claim of a lesbian from Uganda and unlawful detention claim - highlighted that JM (Uganda) CG [2008] UKAIT 00065 -(Chelvan instructed) was distinguished on the facts, and on the basis of post-CG evidence. The First Tier Tribunal allowed SB’s substantive asylum claim - determination promulgated July 2010.
GENDER IDENTITY CLAIMS:
AB (Pakistan) (Admin) (unreported) (July 2009, Mark Ockelton sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)
SSHD concedes fresh claim of trans man from Pakistan during the judicial review substantive hearing (Express news article) – initial claim as a lesbian a year prior to the hearing. SSHD grants refugee status in February 2011, whilst Country Guidance proceedings on first gender identity case to be reported by the Upper Tribunal are being case managed. SSHD also grants refugee status for gay man from Pakistan thereby conceding country evidence of risk to LGBTIs from Pakistan.
E: UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER):
14 JANUARY 2025: Secretary of State for the Home Department v RC (Upper Tribunal determination dismissing SSHD's appeal against FtT determination in deportation proceedings allowing appeal on basis he will face Article 3 ECHR treatment on return. SSHD PTA to the Court of Appeal refused 5 November 2025 (Lewis LJ).
11 OCTOBER 2024: Secretary of State for the Home Department v KR Upper Tribunal grants SSHD's appeal against positive FtT determination allowing protection (asylum and Articel 3 ECHR) and Article 8 ECHR appeal). PTA to the Court of Appeal refused. Application before ECtHR.
DISABILITY/GENDER DOUBLE-BIND - APPROACH TO INTERSECTIONAL ASYLUM CLAIMS:
JI dismissed 19 April 2022, permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal refused 17 November 2023 – Leading Jake Rylatt – where appeal already successful (with grant of LTR) on ‘very significant obstacles’ (Article 8 ECHR, paragraph 276 ADE (vi)) whether in a protection claim based on disability, discrimination amounts to persecution and/or persecution based on a gender/disability crosses risk threshold?
REVOCATION OF REFUGEE STATUS - TRAFFICKED YOUNG MAN FROM ALBANIA -ALLOWED APPEAL BY WAY OF REMITTAL:
AA (unreported) (Albanian Trafficking protection claim of young man, revocation of refugee status proceedings) (Upper Tribunal Judge Lesley Smith, leading Dr Austen Morgan) (4 April 2023)
Error of Law (granted), remittal back to the First-tier Tribunal. Successful Error of Law determination against a 81-page First-tier Tribunal determination. Concession preserved, appellant's dependant on mother's successful refugee appeal, with positive findings of past-persecution of this trafficked male appellant, rendered him a refugee in 2015 (G v G applied, see below).
BANGLADESH – CHALLENGE TO THE HOME OFFICE COUNTRY POLICY - LESBIANS NOT AT RISK:
AN (2021) (UJ Sheridan) – Leading Dr Tariq Mahmood – protection claim from lesbian from Bangladesh - remitted back by the Court of Appeal – to address second limb of HJ (Iran) and whether open lesbians have a well-founded fear of persecution in Bangladesh. Substantive hearing before 2-Judge Panel of the UT addressing procedure for when the Home Office rely on the April 2020 Bangladesh SOGIE CPIN as the starting point for risk assessment (inserted in the Court of Appeal Consent Order), but refuse to tender the report author to be cross-examined. Home Office conceded the substantive appeal in September 2021, accepting grant of refugee status to Appellant's girlfriend resulted in Home Office litigation and policy position impermissible (link).
DEPORTATION – JAMAICA – ARTICLE 3 ECHR – GAY MAN:
COB (16 February 2021) (UJ Pitts) appeal dismissed (Leading Shanthi Sivakumaran for pre-hearing written submissions). Chelvan instructed in earlier proceedings in 2008. Deportation proceedings – section 72 certificate upheld by FTT – no error of law. Upper Tribunal holds at paragraph 37, no Article 3 ECHR risk of gay man from Jamaica, where he 'chose to live a discrete gay life in Jamaica prviously and that he did so in a manner he found tolerable'.
SUR PLACE ACTIVITY AND FORCED MODIFICATION:
AK - (19 November 2020) (UJ Keith) appeal allowed and remitted - accepted FTT materially erred in finding it could dismiss protection appeal of Iranian Kurdish national, on basis he could evade persecution by deleting Facebook posts of attendance at UK demonstrations prior to return to Iran, in order to evade persecution. The real risk approach has recently been addressed as a positive risk by the Upper Tribunal ( see XX (PJAK - sur place activities - Facebook) Iran CG [2022] UKUT 23 (IAC)).
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:
DD (Albania) (unreported) (November 2019) (leading Jake Rylatt in 2019 stage of proceedings)– asylum claim of Albanian woman subjected to domestic violence allowed accepting on internal relocation to Tirana, the discrimination she will face as a single woman with a child amounts to [13] ‘suffering treatment which would, cumulatively, be so serious as to amount to persecution for a Refugee Convention reason.’
INTERNAL RELOCATION:
MB (Internal relocation - burden of proof) Albania [2019] UKUT 392 (IAC) - [24] ‘burden of proof rests with the appellant, where the respondent has identified the location’.
DISCRETION TEST:
MA (Cart JR: effect on UT processes) Pakistan [2019] UKUT 353 (IAC) – procedure for amending grounds before the Upper Tribunal following Cart JR remittal. Importantly addresses the ‘discretion test’ noting the inability of gay man with paranoid schizophrenia to be discreet due to his mental condition [60].
COUNTRY GUIDANCE:
BF (Gay men – Tirana) Albania CG [2019] UKUT 93 (IAC) – Leading Jessica Smeaton. In general a gay man can live openly and freely in Tirana. Permission to appeal refused by the Court of Appeal ( [2019] EWCA Civ. 1781).
UNLAWFUL FORCED MODIFICATION:
MSM (journalists – political opinion – risk) Somalia [2015] UKUT 00251 (IAC)
Guideline case prohibiting forced modification of employment when profession linked to actual political opinion (Leading Counsel to Victoria Hutton (stage 1) and Jessica Smeaton (stage 2)).
COUNTRY GUIDANCE CASES:
SW (Lesbians – HJ and HT applied) Jamaica CG [2011] UKUT 00251 - (accepted risk of persecution to lesbians and straight women who cannot ‘prove’ straight from Jamaica - both cases are still in force as applicable Country Guidance determinations.
TK (LP updated) Sri Lanka CG [2009] UKAIT 00049
Tribunal accepted that risk categories in December 2009 have not diminished since the May 2009 cessation of hostilities. Appeal dismissed on facts with respect to internal relocation alternative – SSHD grants TK Indefinite Leave to Remain prior to oral permission application to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Case superseded by later CG cases.
DW (Homosexuals – Persecution – Sufficiency of Protection) Jamaica CG [2005] UKAIT 000168 (accepted risk of persecution to gay men (and perceived gay men) from Jamaica
SECTION 8 ADVERSE CREDIBILITY FINDINGS:
MM (Section 8: commencement) Iran [2005] UKAIT 0015; [2005] Imm A.R. 666
Section 8 of the 2004 Act (statutory adverse credibility findings) are retrospective to the coming into force of the Act.
F: FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER):
KENYA - LGBT+ ASYLUM CLAIM - KENNETH MACHARIA:
(Unreported, June 2021) - Significant national and international media attention ( eg, The Guardian, Sky Sports, The Evening Standard, Nairobi News, AllAfrica.com), with respect to allowed appeal by the First-tier Tribunal of a gay rugby player from Kenya. Tribunal accepted the Home Office country policy guidance did not accurately reflect the real risk of persecution of gay men in Kenya ( link) .Chelvan had been instructed from 2019, in the intiial successful challenge to the Home Office decision not to treat Kenneth's further submissions as amounting to a fresh asylum and human rights claim as being unlawful in light of the May 2019 Kenyan High Court judgment upholding the constitutionality of the Criminal Code criminalising same-sex conduct.