Upper Tribunal proceedings involving Somali nationals often raise complex questions of country guidance application, including MOJ and Others [2014], OA and Others [2022], and AMM and Others [2011]. Expert evidence at UT level requires particularly rigorous sourcing and analysis given the precedential significance of UT decisions.
UT cases may challenge existing country guidance in light of changed country conditions, including Al-Shabaab's 2025-2026 offensive, ATMIS withdrawal, and updated CPINs. Expert witnesses must demonstrate that their analysis reflects current conditions and explain any divergence from established country guidance.
Oral evidence at Upper Tribunal hearings is common in Somalia cases where clan membership, diaspora support, or Al-Shabaab targeting are in dispute. Experts must be prepared to defend their methodology and conclusions under cross-examination.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does expert evidence differ at Upper Tribunal level?
UT expert reports require greater methodological rigour and comprehensive sourcing. Experts must address how their analysis relates to existing country guidance and explain any updated assessment based on changed conditions. Oral evidence and cross-examination are more common at UT level.
Can expert evidence support a country guidance challenge?
Yes. Where country conditions have changed materially since existing guidance (such as MOJ [2014]), expert evidence documenting those changes can support applications to modify or depart from country guidance. Al-Shabaab's 2025-2026 offensive and ATMIS withdrawal are relevant developments.