C/2001/2772
Neutral Citation Number: [2002] EWCA Civ 396
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE IMMIGRATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2

Wednesday, 20th March 2002
B e f o r e :

LORD JUSTICE KEENE

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

BULENT AVCI
Appellant/Applicant

-v-

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Computer Aided Transcript of the Palantype Notes of
Smith Bernal Reporting Limited
190 Fleet Street  London EC4A 2AG
Tel: 020 7421 4040  Fax: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr E Grieves (instructed by Messrs Howe & Co, London N22) appeared on behalf of the Applicant Appellant.

The Respondent did not appear and was not represented.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

J U D G M E N T
1.	LORD JUSTICE KEENE:I am persuaded that there is a realistically arguable case here. I arrive at that conclusion largely on the ground that is raised as to the way the tribunal approached its findings on the credibility of the applicant - in particular, the way in which they dealt with the issue of whether the applicant could be believed when he said that there was a demonstration which took place in Istanbul on 15th August 2000. 
2.	It seems to me that if it is right that this was not an issue raised at the hearing before the tribunal, and if in those circumstances, as Mr Grieves says, further evidence would have been put in had the issue been raised, then the material that I have now seen - for example, from Reuters - dealing with the continued significance of 15th August, even in the year 2000, for the PKK, could well have led to a different decision on the part of the tribunal on the credibility of the applicant on this point. That material was not before them because the point, I am told, was not raised. That finding of the lack of credibility of the applicant on that issue could well have influenced the tribunal's mind on other matters. 
3.	I have to say that the applicant may still have something of an uphill struggle in relation to whether or not he was mistreated while in detention in September 2000, but I accept that there is material which he will want to put forward to demonstrate that even someone playing a low level part in the PKK would, once he had been arrested and detained as recently as September 2000, be at risk if he were to be returned to Turkey at this stage. 
4.	As I say, I take the view that this is properly arguable and on that basis I am prepared to grant permission to appeal. I do not confine the appeal to any one of the grounds raised in the appellant's notice. The appellant may argue such of them as he thinks fit. 
Order: application for permission to appeal granted (appeal to be heard by 3 LJJ, time estimate ½ day); public funding, if granted, to cover today's hearing.