Gaoua v Secretary of State for the Home Department

1. LORD JUSTICE KEENE: I propose to grant permission to appeal in this case. I am persuaded by Mr Gill that this case is properly arguable on the basis that the IAT's approach did not accord with that required by this court's decision in Subesh and ors v Secretary of State [2003] EWCA Civ 56 , and that it is properly arguable that the Tribunal here was merely expressing a different view of the facts and no more than that. 2. I also see some force in the point made in the supplementary skeleton about the inconsistency of the Tribunal's decision here with that which was reached by the Tribunal in the case of Y , a copy of which decision is attached to Mr Gill's supplementary skeleton. It is a decision dated 8 June 2004. Paragraph 22 seems particularly relevant. 3. I therefore grant leave for that additional ground set out in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the supplementary skeleton dated 21 July 2004. I formally grant permission to appeal on the grounds as thus amended, and there is an application for an extension of time as well. I grant that application. Order: application allowed. Time estimate of one day. To be heard before a three-judge court, with three Lord Justices or two Lord Justices and one High Court Judge. An order for public funding subject to the usual means testing criteria and for detailed assessment.