BUF15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 2050

BUF15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 2050

The appeal was dismissed because the primary judge made no appealable error in concluding that the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings, rejection of the appellant's claimed conversion and claimed past harm, and treatment of corroborative documents were open on the material and did not disclose jurisdictional error; the appeal grounds largely sought merits review or raised an unarticulated procedural fairness complaint not properly before the Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal From BUF15 V Minister for Immigration & Anor (no 2) [2017] FCCA 2092
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Criterion' 'complementary Protection Criterion' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'merits Review' 'corroborative Evidence']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Criterion' 'complementary Protection Criterion' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'merits Review' 'corroborative Evidence']

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 Judicial Review Decision / Appeal From BUF15 V Minister for Immigration & Anor (no 2) [2017] FCCA 2092

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in finding no jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings about the appellant's claimed conversion from Sunni to Shia Islam." "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the appellant's asserted risk of serious harm in Pakistan by religious extremists, the state, or sectarian violence." "Whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by rejecting documentary evidence said to corroborate the appellant's claims." "Whether the grounds of appeal established appealable error rather than disagreement with the Tribunal's merits findings."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the primary judge made no appealable error in concluding that the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings, rejection of the appellant's claimed conversion and claimed past harm, and treatment of corroborative documents were open on the material and did not disclose jurisdictional error; the appeal grounds largely sought merits review or raised an unarticulated procedural fairness complaint not properly before the Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']