HC Deb 09 July 1998 vol 315 cc593-4W
Ms Oona King

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many applications were made by his Department for leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal in non-asylum cases in the period 31 May 1997 to 1 June 1998; and how many were(a) granted, (b) refused and (c) withdrawn; [49319]

(2) how many applications were made by his Department for leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal in asylum cases in the period 31 May 1997 to 1 June 1998; and how many were (a) granted, (b) refused and (c) withdrawn; [49313]

(3) how many applications were made by individual appellants for leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal in asylum cases in the period 31 May 1997 to 1 June 1998; and how many were (a) granted, (b) refused and (c) withdrawn; [49314]

(4) how many applications were made by individual appellants for leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal in non-asylum cases in the period 31 May 1997 to 1 June 1998; and how many were (a) granted, (b) refused and (c) withdrawn. [49320]

Mr. Mike O'Brien

The available information is that, in the period 1 June 1997 to 31 May 1998, a total of 13,242 applications for leave to appeal to the Immigration Appeal Tribunal were lodged, of which 9,536 related to asylum cases and 3,706 to non-asylum cases. In the same period, 12,616 applications for leave to appeal were decided by the Tribunal, 9,150 in asylum cases and 3,466 non-asylum cases.

Statistics of the breakdown of Immigration Appeal Tribunal applications in asylum cases are not available for the full period requested. However, between June and December 1997, it is estimated that of 5,824 applications for leave to appeal to the Tribunal, 99 per cent. were lodged by the appellant and just over 1 per cent. by the Home Office. In the same period, 5,319 applications were decided, of which approximately 18 per cent. were granted leave to appeal, 17 per cent. to the appellant and 1 per cent. to the Home Office.

I regret that the detailed breakdown requested for non-asylum cases, by appellant and type of decision, would be available only from the inspection of individual cases files and therefore at disproportionate cost.