The Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) has said that expert reports on internet material will assist the Tribunal if they meet four stated conditions, in SU (Expert reports – format), issued on 9 July 2026.
SU (Expert reports – format) Bangladesh [2026] UKUT 317 (IAC) was heard at Field House on 18 May 2026 before Upper Tribunal Judge Jackson and Upper Tribunal Judge Keith, and issued on 9 July 2026. It is a protection appeal remade after an earlier error of law finding. The headnote gives guidance on the content of expert evidence.
The Tribunal says expert evidence, particularly a report evaluating publicly available internet information of varying accuracy or reliability (so-called "Digital Open Source Information"), will assist the Tribunal if:
1. It is an independent product of the expert. Source material should not be copied in as if written by the author. Quoted material should be identified with quotation marks and a web-link to the source, with an English translation if available, so the source can be transparently evaluated. 2. It clearly identifies the sources relied on and, so far as possible, uses the primary source (such as a government press release or NGO report) rather than a news article describing it. 3. It directly considers the particular facts of the appellant's case where asked to do so, applying the general conclusions to those facts, with due regard to any preserved findings of fact. 4. Where a party has raised issues on aspects of the report, the expert addresses those concerns directly, bearing in mind the overriding duty to the Tribunal to assist on matters within the expert's own expertise.
The headnote adds that where an expert is based outside the United Kingdom and does not have permission to attend to be cross-examined, a written process may be followed. It says rigour in the format of the report may limit the questions needed of the expert.
In the decision itself, the appellant, a national of Bangladesh, claimed to be at risk on return because of his political opinion and links to Jamaat-e-Islami. The expert report of 8 December 2025, updated on 16 March 2026, was summarised in the decision. The Tribunal noted that the amendments were not marked up. It also recorded that the updated report did not, at the time of filing, contain the annexures on the expert's profile and qualifications or his declaration of duty to the Tribunal. The appellant's representatives said this was an oversight, and the annexes were forwarded separately to the Tribunal and the Respondent during the hearing. The Respondent took no issue on this. The decision also notes places where the report referred to human rights organisations, local media and international observers without naming or citing them.
What this means for applicants
Appellants and representatives relying on expert reports in the Upper Tribunal can check them against the four conditions above before filing. Where a report quotes sources, the Tribunal says the quotation should be marked and linked to its source. The Tribunal says reports will assist if they identify their sources and use primary sources so far as possible. Where the expert has been asked to consider the appellant's case, the report should apply its conclusions to those facts, with regard to any preserved findings. Where the expert is abroad and cannot attend, a written process may be followed, and a rigorous report format may limit the questions needed.
Related guide
Sources
- SU v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Expert reports – format), [2026] UKUT 317 (IAC), Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), 9 July 2026