Alison Stanley is wrong to say that a review by the High Court of a decision of the new Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) on a point of law will never succeed if the decision-maker errs in assessing the risk of return to the asylum-seeker's home state (see [2004] Gazette, 21 October, 5).


At present, an appeal from an adjudicator to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (IAT) (and from it to the Court of Appeal) is on a point of law only. It is clearly established in public law that an adjudicator makes an error of law if he reaches a decision that no reasonable adjudicator could properly reach on the available evidence, including that on country conditions. It will be no different after April 2005 when the AIT will be launched.


The position is more complex at present when the country conditions change between the date of an adjudicator hearing and the date of an appeal to the IAT.



The law on this point has recently been reviewed by the Court of Appeal in CA v SSHD [2004] EWCA Civ 1165.



Ms Stanley's suggestion that AIT members will not be 'objective persons' is a calumny on existing adjudicators and AIT members.



Charles Blake, part-time immigration adjudicator, Glynnes, London