FDX19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1232

FDX19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1232

The Tribunal carefully assessed the appellants' past experiences, country information, immigration history, false identities and individual claims, and found no real chance of serious harm or significant harm on return to Indonesia. The asserted risk of deterioration in tolerance of IJ or LDII was not a claim or matter arising on the material and the Tribunal did not depart from the real chance test. The Tribunal gave rational reasons for giving little weight to the witness evidence and its treatment of the appellant wife's sexual assault risk showed genuine engagement with the claims and evidence. No jurisdictional error by the Tribunal, and no error by the primary judge, was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Judicial Review Applications Concerning Protection Visa Refusals / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'real Chance Test' 'complementary Protection' 'religious Persecution' 'credibility Assessment' 'country Information' 'sexual Assault Risk on Return']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'real Chance Test' 'complementary Protection' 'religious Persecution' 'credibility Assessment' 'country Information' 'sexual Assault Risk on Return']

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 Dismissal of Judicial Review Applications Concerning Protection Visa Refusals / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge erred in ruling that the Tribunal's failure to consider the risk of deterioration in tolerance of LDII and IJ did not give rise to jurisdictional error." "Whether the primary judge erred in ruling that the Tribunal's treatment of evidence from one of the appellants' witnesses did not give rise to jurisdictional error." "Whether the primary judge erred in ruling that the Tribunal's finding of no real chance that the appellant wife would be subject to sexual assault in the future did not give rise to jurisdictional error." "Whether the Tribunal's use of the appellants' false identities and provision of false information in assessing credibility involved legal error."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal carefully assessed the appellants' past experiences, country information, immigration history, false identities and individual claims, and found no real chance of serious harm or significant harm on return to Indonesia. The asserted risk of deterioration in tolerance of IJ or LDII was not a claim or matter arising on the material and the Tribunal did not depart from the real chance test. The Tribunal gave rational reasons for giving little weight to the witness evidence and its treatment of the appellant wife's sexual assault risk showed genuine engagement with the claims and evidence. No jurisdictional error by the Tribunal, and no error by the primary judge, was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

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