ANG15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 225

ANG15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 225

The Tribunal correctly applied the law on 'significant harm', particularly the intentionality requirement affirmed in SZTAL, and properly considered the appellant's claims, including his fear of harm as a practising Christian. The appeal fails on both legal and factual grounds.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court; Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'significant Harm' 'complementary Protection' 'intentionality in Harm']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'significant Harm' 'complementary Protection' 'intentionality in Harm']

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

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court; Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal erred in assessing 'significant harm' under the Migration Act by requiring intentionality" "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the appellant's claim to fear harm as a practising Christian"]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal correctly applied the law on 'significant harm', particularly the intentionality requirement affirmed in SZTAL, and properly considered the appellant's claims, including his fear of harm as a practising Christian. The appeal fails on both legal and factual grounds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs."]