Latest news with #UpperTribunal
Bloomberg
05-08-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
UK Fines Woodford £46 Million on Failures Ahead of Fund Collapse
The UK's Financial Conduct Authority fined Neil Woodford, the once-renowned investment manager, and his fund empire a total of £46 million ($61.1 million) over shortcomings in the lead up to the fund's collapse. Woodford himself was fined £5.88 million and banned from holding senior manager roles in the industry and managing funds for retail investors, according to a statement on Tuesday. Woodford Investment Management received a fine of £40 million. Both Woodford and the company are challenging the decision in the Upper Tribunal.
Telegraph
04-08-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Kurdish migrant claiming asylum over ‘affair with uncle's wife'
An Iraqi Kurd who arrived in Britain on a small boat claimed asylum because he had an affair with his uncle's wife. The unnamed man, named only as BQ, claimed that he would be killed by his uncle if he returned home and also feared that he would be 'targeted' by his wife's family. BQ claimed that the affair began in February 2018 and he was caught in 2019, before he fled to his sister's house and then left Iraq. He was taken to the Turkish border and then travelled through Europe before he entered the UK by boat in December 2020. He claimed asylum on December 10 2020 but his claim was refused three years later. BQ appealed that decision at the first-tier tribunal, where a judge rejected his claims based on inconsistencies between his asylum screening interview and his later, substantive asylum interview. In his appeal witness statement, BQ said: 'I would go to see [my aunt] around once a week when my uncle was not home, due to his job he would be away from home for days at a time... and as my family were aware of my uncle's wife's situation, and as we were related, no one questioned if I was seen at my uncle's house. Regardless, we were careful not to be seen.' He has appealed the decision to the Upper tribunal on five grounds and said he refutes the judge's claims that he gave inconsistent answers about relationship status and held this against his credibility. Upper tribunal Judge Mark Blundell agreed the judge made errors on all five grounds, and the matter will be heard again at the first-tier tribunal for a rehearing. Mr Blundell said: 'The common law principle of fairness requires the tribunal to consider with care the extent to which reliance can properly be placed on the answers given by the applicant in his screening interview.' Andrew Deakin, the deputy judge of the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum chamber, said: 'In light of the number and significance of the errors identified, I cannot be confident that the judge would have reached the same conclusion even if he had not erred in the ways identified above. I accordingly find that the errors identified above are material.' The rehearing will be heard before a different judge.
Daily Mail
17-07-2025
- Daily Mail
Albanian who beat man with umbrella before smashing his face on the pavement wins right to stay in UK after judge says attack was a 'one-off'
An Albanian who beat a man so violently with an umbrella that it disintegrated before smashing his face on the pavement has won his case to remain in Britain. Vangel Gkika, 50, won an asylum case after serving a two-and-a-half-year jail term for the 'brutal' assault. He faced deportation over the attack in 2020, but now the immigration court has ruled he can stay because it was a 'one-off'. Gkika was jailed after he travelled on the London Underground to a location where he knew his victim - a friend of his - would be and carried out the 'brutal' assault. His weapon, an umbrella, was used with so much 'force' it physically disintegrated and then Gkika smashed his victim's head on the pavement twice. His victim was traumatised and needed surgery. Gkika, who is a dual national of both Albania and Greece, is a painter and decorator and is based in Surrey. After a five-year delay, the Upper Tribunal has now heard his appeal against his deportation order. It was ruled that the father does not pose a 'genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat'. The Upper Tribunal heard that Albanian-born Gkika moved to the UK in 2013 after living in Greece for 22 years. In 2016, he carried out the 'sustained and violent assault' on a man who he had been having an ongoing dispute with. The panel heard he had known the man for many years as their mothers were friends and neighbours. In his witness statement, he said they were childhood friends and had grown up together in Albania. Bu, their relationship 'soured' and the pair exchanged several threatening and abusive messages to one another. Gkika said a 'bitter dispute' had arisen between them, which resulted in the assault. On the day of the attack, Gkika took the London Underground to an area where he knew his victim would be. The judgment states: 'He attacked him using an umbrella, which he used with such force that it disintegrated. When it did so, [Mr Gkika] took the man's head and banged it twice onto the pavement where he had been standing.' It was heard the victim needed surgery, having sustained a broken cheekbone and scarring to his face, and the following year he was still experiencing dizziness and anxiety. Gkika was set for trial in 2017 but he changed his plea at the last minute and he was sentenced to 32 months in jail. The judge also imposed a 10-year restraining order which is due to expire in 2027, it was heard. After he was released from custody, Gkika returned to live with his wife and children at their home in Surrey. The Secretary of State signed a deportation order against him in September 2018 as it was established that the 'personal conduct of the person concerned represents a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society'. After hearing evidence that Gkika was an 'aggressor', the official said his 'deportation was a justified interference with his right to freedom of movement'. Gkika appealed the decision to the First-tier Tribunal, but this was dismissed in March 2020. He again appealed it to the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. Upper Tribunal Judge Gaenor Bruce found the previous tribunal had made an error in law for several reasons. The judge said that 'significant' weight was placed in the earlier decision on the fact that Gkika had not completed any rehabilitation courses in prison. But, Judge Bruce heard that no courses were offered to Gkika, who was a first-time offender and 'not deemed a sufficiently high risk to justify the expense'. Judge Bruce also said that in the earlier proceedings, Gkika was asked to disprove that he 'posed a risk' - when actually this should have been a matter for the Home Office to prove. The judge said for reasons that remain unclear, nothing further happened in the appeal until this year. Lawyers representing the Home Office spoke of the 'brutal' assault, and referred to eyewitnesses who said they were surprised his victim had 'not lost an eye'. They said 'an aggravating feature of the assault was the use of the umbrella as a weapon'. Lawyers representing Gkika referred to comments from the trial judge, who sentenced Mr Gkika, and described the assault as an 'aberration' and that he was otherwise a 'model citizen'. Judge Bruce said that Gkika is self-employed as a painter and decorator, and has several 'glowing testimonials' from satisfied customers. They said his children have grown up in the UK and are now either at university or college, and that Gkika 'deeply regrets' his part in this violence, which was a 'one off'. Judge Bruce upheld Mr Gkika's appeal, meaning he will not be deported. The judge said: 'The offence was, on all the available evidence, quite plainly out of character and was indeed a 'one-off'. 'That is not to diminish the harm that it caused to the victim, or to in any way disagree that [Gkika] should have been sent to prison for a significant amount of time. He clearly should have been. 'The central question for me today is whether there is a 'genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat' in [Gkika] today being allowed to remain in the UK. 'There is no evidence at all that he is a risk to anyone other than the victim of the original assault, and in respect of that, the evidence amounts to this. 'I am satisfied that he understands only too well that any further offending, harassment or harm to his victim could see him facing deportation again, and the life he has built for himself and his family here destroyed.'
The Irish Sun
04-07-2025
- The Irish Sun
Murderer avoids deportation to Jamaica after judge said ‘he has an admirable work ethic'
A JAMAICAN murderer has won a human rights appeal to stay in the country after a judge said he has an "admirable work ethic". The unnamed killer has avoided deportation after an immigration court in Cardiff ruled key facts in the case had not been properly considered. Advertisement 4 He mounted a legal fight for asylum in Britain after the Home Office attempted to deport him Credit: Getty 4 Details of the murder were not specified Credit: AFP He mounted a legal fight for asylum in Britain after the Home Office attempted to deport him. The man - who has been in the UK since 1996 - lost an initial appeal against the decision to deny him asylum at a first-tier immigration tribunal. But his second appeal at the Upper Tribunal was successful, meaning the case is set to be heard again. A judgement explained that he committed murder, but details of the offence were not specified. Advertisement Read more News He has been through "offender management" during his rehabilitation and now shows an "admirable work ethic". The man also argued that he "feared" deportation because he would be targeted by Jamaican crime syndicate One Order. He claimed that his family home had been attacked by the gang, who shot his brothers and forced his sister into witness protection. The Jamaican accused the judge at the First-tier Tribunal of not properly considering his concerns. Advertisement Most read in The Sun Upper Tribunal Judge Sean O'Brien agreed that the man could be in danger if he were to return. He ruled that the First-tier Tribunal had "misunderstood" evidence given by the murderer and "overlooked" potential risks in Jamaica. Judge O'Brien added: 'The [First-tier Tribunal] judge had overlooked the fact that the core elements of the [Jamaican's] account were not challenged by [the Home Office]. "It had misunderstood [his] evidence about [his] family he claimed had been murdered because of gang retribution and when, and had given no apparent consideration to the attempts made to verify that [his] sister remained in Witness Protection. Advertisement Sun probe uncovers asylum seekers in hotels linked to string of rape cases "I agree therefore that the judge's findings on the credibility of the [Jamaican's] account of events in Jamaica involved the making of an error of law. "All in all, I cannot be satisfied that the judge would necessarily have found that the [Jamaican] would not be at risk from the One Order Gang had she taken a permissible approach to credibility." The One Order gang mainly operates out of Spanish Town - an area on the Caribbean island regarded as a hotbed for criminal activity. It is the latest in a string of cases where offenders have called on Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), claiming they would face persecution if returned. Advertisement The judgement said: "[The Jamaican said] the judge had failed to take into account that the key facts were not disputed by the Home Office. "The judge was wrong to find [him] vague in naming the One Order Gang as the source of risk. "The judge misunderstood which family members had been murdered and when. "The judge failed to take into account the steps taken by and on behalf of the [him] to confirm that [his] sister was in the Witness Protection Programme." Advertisement It comes just months after an Albanian criminal was allowed to stay in Britain after arguing his son did not like foreign chicken nuggets. An immigration tribunal ruled it would have been "unduly harsh" for the child to be deported to Albania with his father due to his sensitivity around food as well other "additional" needs. Father Klevis Disha, 39, successfully appealed his deportation at a lower-tier immigration tribunal in which his son's distaste for foreign chicken nuggets was listed as the only example of his food difficulties. The case also focused on his son's needs in regards to sensory issues and difficulties communicating emotions. Advertisement 4 It is the latest in a string of cases where offenders have called on Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights Credit: Getty 4 The One Order gang mainly operates out of Spanish Town - an area on the Caribbean island regarded as a hotbed for criminal activity Credit: AFP Advertisement
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Murderer cannot be deported because rival gang would kill him
A Jamaican murderer has avoided deportation after claiming he will be targeted by a notorious gang if returned home. The killer won a human rights appeal at an immigration court after telling of his 'fear' of the powerful One Order gang on the Caribbean island. The crime syndicate is said to be affiliated with the Jamaica Labour party and is accused of killings, extortion and drug dealing. The Jamaican man claimed his family members had been killed by the One Order, and his sister had to be put into a witness protection programme. The unnamed migrant – who has been in the UK since 1996 and committed murder – has mounted a legal fight for protection in Britain. He argued that Britain must grant him asylum and not deport him back to Jamaica on human rights grounds because he will be 'targeted' by the One Order. The Home Office tried to deport him and he lost an initial appeal against their decision at a first-tier immigration tribunal.. But, he has now won an appeal at the Upper Tribunal, which ruled he could be at risk from the gang if returned. The Upper Tribunal found the lower court 'overlooked' key concerns about potential dangers for him in Jamaica and did not properly assess his 'credibility'. It ruled that his case must be heard again. The case is the latest revealed by The Telegraph where foreign criminals have used Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to claim they would face persecution if deported. Ministers are planning to rewrite rules to make it harder to allow appeals against removal. The One Order gang is said to be responsible for hundreds of killings over its rivalries with other gangs. One of its leaders, Othneil 'Thickman' Lobban, was this year gunned down and killed by police, sparking a violent backlash that closed schools and businesses. The Upper Tribunal, sitting in Cardiff, was told that the unnamed Jamaican migrant seeking asylum 'fears being targeted in Jamaica by the One Order Gang' as 'his family have been targeted there'. He has been in the UK since 1996, mostly without leave to remain. A judgment said he committed murder but did not specify details, other than that he has been through 'offender management' during his rehabilitation and now shows an 'admirable work ethic'. The Jamaican argued that the first-tier tribunal judge had not properly considered key facts about his concerns about the One Order gang, which the Home Office had not disputed. His sister was in a witness protection programme while his brothers had been shot in Jamaica and the family home was attacked. Upper Tribunal Judge Sean O'Brien said the first-tier tribunal was mistaken in its ruling. Judge O'Brien said: 'The [First-tier Tribunal] judge had overlooked the fact that the core elements of the [Jamaican's] account were not challenged by [the Home Office], had misunderstood [his] evidence about [his] family he claimed had been murdered because of gang retribution and when, and had given no apparent consideration to the attempts made to verify that [his] sister remained in Witness Protection. 'I agree therefore that the judge's findings on the credibility of the [Jamaican's] account of events in Jamaica involved the making of an error of law.' Judge O'Brien cast doubt over elements of the migrant's claims and said because he has been away for so long, he may avoid being targeted. But he said because of the previous 'erroneous' and 'unsustainable' ruling, a fresh hearing must be held. 'All in all, I cannot be satisfied that the judge would necessarily have found that the [Jamaican] would not be at risk from the One Order Gang had she taken a permissible approach to credibility', the judge added. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
