The pressure of large numbers of asylum applications and appeals that should not have reached the Court of Appeal was the 'dominant feature' of the court's year, it emerged last week.


The annual report of the court's civil division, for the year to 30 September 2006, revealed that almost 30% of its workload came from the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and the Immigration Appeal Tribunal, up from 17% in 2004/5 and 12% in 2003/4.



Lord Justice Brooke, who retired recently as the court's vice-president, wrote in the report: 'It seems odd that the Court of Appeal remains the only appeal destination for challenges to the determinations of a single immigration judge on a reconsideration of an appeal. By the very nature of things, single judges are bound to make errors of law from time to time which raise no point of general importance such as to warrant the attention of a court of this stature.'



To make matters worse, he added, 60% of the asylum appeals listed for hearing are conceded by the Home Office before the hearing takes place but often too late to list another appeal.



More generally, the report said the frequency of last-minute settlements is a persistent problem for the court and research is being carried out to identify remediable causes.



Neil Rose