CAQ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 709

CAQ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 709

The Tribunal's definitive rejection of the appellant's claim as manufactured and not credible meant there was no jurisdictional error and no requirement to consider the 'what if I am wrong' test in assessing risk of harm; appeal dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: CAQ16; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Protection Visas, Adverse Credibility Findings, Jurisdictional Error, Real Chance Test
Migration Law Protection Visas Adverse Credibility Findings Jurisdictional Error Real Chance Test

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CAQ16

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred by failing to apply the 'what if I am wrong' approach when considering the real chance test for protection visa eligibility
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal's findings were too tentative to constitute an unequivocal rejection of the appellant's claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's definitive rejection of the appellant's claim as manufactured and not credible meant there was no jurisdictional error and no requirement to consider the 'what if I am wrong' test in assessing risk of harm; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed with costs.