| HJ and HT v Home Secretary | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United Kingdom |
| Full case name | HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department |
| Decided | 7 July 2010 |
| Citation | [2010] UKSC 31 |
| Transcript | Judgement |
| Case history | |
| Prior action | [2009] EWCA Civ 172 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Hope, Rodger, Walker, Collins, Dyson |
| Case opinions | |
| The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal, holding that the ‘reasonable tolerability’ test applied by the Court of Appeal is contrary to the Convention and should not be followed in the future. HJ and HT’s cases are remitted for reconsideration in light of the detailed guidance provided by the Supreme Court. | |
| Keywords | |
| Right of asylum | |
HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31 is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom concerning two men, from Iran and Cameroon respectively, claiming asylum in the United Kingdom on the grounds of their homosexuality. The men's claims had previously been turned down on the basis they would not face persecution in their own countries if they would conceal their sexuality. The appeal therefore centred on the question as to whether the men on their return could reasonably be expected to tolerate this requirement of discretion; the so-called 'discretion' or 'reasonable tolerability' test. Interventions were made by the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
The case was heard between 10 and 12 May 2010 with a judgement delivered on 7 July 2010, in which the Court ruled unanimously that the men could not be expected to conceal their sexuality in this way, and that it was wrong to apply the so-called 'discretion test' to such claims. The cases were then both remitted to be reconsidered according to the advice contained in the judgement.