AUW18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1280

AUW18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1280

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant identified no appellable error in the Federal Circuit Court's decision. The Tribunal's adverse credibility findings and rejection of the protection claims were reasonably open, the appellant's new or unparticularised contentions did not demonstrate legal unreasonableness or statutory breach, and s 91R did not apply to his 2017 protection visa application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'credibility Findings']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'credibility Findings']

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 / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in finding no error in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal's decision affirming refusal of a protection visa." 'Whether the Tribunal acted in a manifestly unreasonable way or breached statutory obligations by ignoring persecution and harm under s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' "Whether the appellant identified legal or factual errors in the Tribunal's decision."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant identified no appellable error in the Federal Circuit Court's decision. The Tribunal's adverse credibility findings and rejection of the protection claims were reasonably open, the appellant's new or unparticularised contentions did not demonstrate legal unreasonableness or statutory breach, and s 91R did not apply to his 2017 protection visa application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

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