Applicants A169 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 727

Applicants A169 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 727

The Refugee Review Tribunal correctly found that the applicants did not have a well-founded fear of persecution, and even if they did, effective State protection was available, so the application for judicial review must fail.

Parties
Applicant: Applicants A169 of 2003; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Ian Lincoln, Member Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: Principal Member, Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Well Founded Fear of Persecution, State Protection, Jurisdictional Error, Natural Justice
Migration Protection Visa Well Founded Fear of Persecution State Protection Jurisdictional Error Natural Justice

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicants A169 of 2003

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Ian Lincoln, Member Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Principal Member, Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to take into account the risk to applicants if the truce between LTTE and Sri Lankan government broke down
  2. 2 Whether the applicants had a well-founded fear of persecution
  3. 3 Whether State protection in Sri Lanka was effective

Ratio Decidendi

The Refugee Review Tribunal correctly found that the applicants did not have a well-founded fear of persecution, and even if they did, effective State protection was available, so the application for judicial review must fail.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • The applicants to pay the first respondent's costs.