APD21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1035

APD21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1035

The Tribunal gave adequate reasons for its decision, including reasons for rejecting parts of the appellant's evidence about events in Vietnam and for finding that his attendance at Viet Tan rallies or meetings in Australia had not been shown to have come to the attention of Vietnamese authorities. The primary judge correctly concluded that the Tribunal completed its statutory task under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and no jurisdictional error or error in the primary judge's reasoning was shown. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court Concerning Refusal of a Protection Visa / Appeal to the Federal Court Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs payable by the appellant to the first respondent.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'complementary Protection Criterion' 'federal Court Appeal']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'complementary Protection Criterion' 'federal Court Appeal']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From Decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court Concerning Refusal of a Protection Visa / Appeal to the Federal Court Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal gave adequate reasons for refusing the appellant's protection visa application, particularly in relation to the evidence." 'Whether the primary judge erred in finding no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal concerning s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' "Whether the Tribunal's findings supported the conclusion that there were no substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk of harm if the appellant were removed to Vietnam."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal gave adequate reasons for its decision, including reasons for rejecting parts of the appellant's evidence about events in Vietnam and for finding that his attendance at Viet Tan rallies or meetings in Australia had not been shown to have come to the attention of Vietnamese authorities. The primary judge correctly concluded that the Tribunal completed its statutory task under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and no jurisdictional error or error in the primary judge's reasoning was shown. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs payable by the appellant to the first respondent.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant do pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal, to be assessed on a lump sum basis by a registrar if not agreed."]