Alshammari v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] CSIH 26 — Inner House grants permission: corroboration of undocumented-Bidoon status must be assessed, not bypassed by general credibility findings

The petitioner claimed to be an undocumented Bidoon from Kuwait. The court recorded that 'The Home Office does not, in principle, dispute that undocumented Bidoons are entitled to such protection, but it does not accept that the petitioner is an undocumented Bidoon' [1]. He challenged the Lord Ordinary's refusal (8 July 2020) of permission for judicial review of the Upper Tribunal's refusal (14 October 2019) of permission to appeal [1]–[2].

The First-tier Tribunal, applying KB and AH (credibility-structured approach) Pakistan [2017] UKUT 491, found that the petitioner had concealed a US visa application made in Baghdad on an Iraqi passport, had not harboured a fugitive as claimed, and had entered the UK on a false Kuwaiti passport [7]. It concluded that he was not credible and did not accept that he was an undocumented Kuwaiti Bidoon, making no finding on his true nationality [12].

The sole issue on appeal was the treatment of one witness, Naef Abdulla Al-shamari, 'the only witness who could give evidence about the petitioner's claimed status as an undocumented Bidoon' [5]. His statement described informal schooling at a mosque — 'this is where people study informally … when you are an undocumented Bedoon. Anyone who is registered would go to school' — and exclusion from health services, schooling, driving licences, marriage certificates and employment [6]. The tribunal made no criticism of him, noting only that the witnesses' evidence was 'broadly consistent' [8], [11].

The court held: 'It is trite that parts of a witness's evidence can be untruthful or unreliable but other parts may be truthful and reliable' (citing Daoud [2005] EWCA Civ 755) [13], and that there was 'an argument of some substance' that the tribunal erred in law, either by reaching its view on the core issue 'without having proper regard to Naef's supporting evidence', or by rejecting that evidence 'without stating that conclusion or explaining the basis upon which it had been reached' [14]. On the 'compelling reason' limb it accepted that 'if an appellant has lost twice in the tribunals system, that ought almost always to be the end of the road' [19], but found that under NM 'it is common ground that because of them undocumented Bidoons are at risk of persecution', and that the strongly arguable error combined with those consequences 'cry out for permission to be granted' [20]. The appeal was allowed and permission granted [21].

This is a permission-stage decision: the court did not decide that the petitioner is an undocumented Bidoon, only that the challenge must be heard.

USE IN A REPORT: authority, in a Bidoon claim specifically, for the proposition that adverse credibility findings on collateral matters do not dispose of the core question of undocumented status where independent corroboration of that status has not been expressly assessed and reasoned. For witness and expert evidence, it illustrates the kind of community-specific detail (informal mosque schooling, exclusion from documentation) that goes to the core issue.

For practitioners: a permission decision, so its weight on the facts is limited, but its reasoning is orthodox and transferable — the structured-credibility approach does not license a tribunal to pass over unchallenged corroboration on the core issue (Daoud; S (AAS) 2011 SLT 1058; AR [2017] CSIH 52). It is also a useful record that the Secretary of State accepted, as common ground, the risk to undocumented Bidoon under NM, so that litigation in such cases turns on status, not on risk. For caseworkers preparing a claim: statements from recognised Bidoon refugees should explain how the witness knows the claimant's documentation status in particular, so that the point cannot be passed over as general 'consistency'. For Scottish practice, read with Al-Enezi v SSHD [2020] CSIH 54, which reached the Inner House by the same section 27B route.