SZUEP v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 94

SZUEP v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 94

The appeal failed because the transcript and reasons did not establish actual bias or a reasonable apprehension of bias, the Tribunal considered the Khawar issue and was entitled to find no official policy, toleration or condonation of discriminatory withholding of State protection for a Convention reason, and the Tribunal did not deny procedural fairness or fail to consider the first appellant's particular circumstances when finding relocation reasonable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection (class Xa) Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'actual Bias' 'apprehended Bias' 'convention Nexus' 'state Protection' 'relocation' 'complementary Protection Criteria']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection (class Xa) Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'actual Bias' 'apprehended Bias' 'convention Nexus' 'state Protection' 'relocation' 'complementary Protection Criteria']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary judge was actually biased or caused apprehended bias.' 'Whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error by failing to consider whether denial of State protection was for a Convention reason.' "Whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error in considering relocation by failing to consider the first appellant's circumstances concerning her daughter and previous claimed denial of State protection."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the transcript and reasons did not establish actual bias or a reasonable apprehension of bias, the Tribunal considered the Khawar issue and was entitled to find no official policy, toleration or condonation of discriminatory withholding of State protection for a Convention reason, and the Tribunal did not deny procedural fairness or fail to consider the first appellant's particular circumstances when finding relocation reasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellants pay the first respondent's costs, as agreed or taxed."]