CVZ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 309

CVZ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 309

The Immigration Assessment Authority properly took into account the appellant’s risk profile including familial ties to the LTTE and extortion claims, relied on country information, and made factual findings that past extortion did not amount to serious or significant harm and that the appellant did not meet the requirements for protection. The primary judge’s findings were justified and open on the evidence, and there was no error of law; consequently, the appeal must be dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: CVZ16; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Immigration Assessment Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Federal Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fast Track Review, Safe Haven Enterprise Visa, Refugee Definition, Complementary Protection, Judicial Review, Extortion and Risk Profile
Migration Administrative Law Human Rights Fast Track Review Safe Haven Enterprise Visa Refugee Definition Complementary Protection Judicial Review +1 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CVZ16

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Immigration Assessment Authority

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Federal Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Immigration Assessment Authority properly considered the appellant's risk profile and extortion claims in relation to fear of harm for familial links to LTTE and as a failed asylum seeker
  2. 2 Whether there was a Convention nexus in the extortion claims
  3. 3 Whether the IAA failed to deal with risk profile relating to familial links with LTTE

Ratio Decidendi

The Immigration Assessment Authority properly took into account the appellant’s risk profile including familial ties to the LTTE and extortion claims, relied on country information, and made factual findings that past extortion did not amount to serious or significant harm and that the appellant did not meet the requirements for protection. The primary judge’s findings were justified and open on the evidence, and there was no error of law; consequently, the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs, to be assessed if not agreed.