DPK17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 776

DPK17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 776

Jurisdictional error was not established because the Tribunal considered the relevant country information and submissions regarding the treatment of transgender persons in Malaysia, applied the definition of significant harm including mental harm, and undertook a comprehensive assessment. Therefore, the FCCA was correct in dismissing the judicial review application; the appeal must be dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: DPK17; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appellate Judgment From Federal Circuit Court, Reviewing Tribunal Decision on Protection Visa
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Jurisdictional Error, Complementary Protection, Treatment of Transgender Persons, Significant Harm, Cruel or Inhuman Treatment, Country Information Evaluation
Migration Administrative Law Human Rights Protection Visa Jurisdictional Error Complementary Protection Treatment of Transgender Persons Significant Harm +2 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DPK17

Appellant

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appellate Judgment From Federal Circuit Court, Reviewing Tribunal Decision on Protection Visa

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Tribunal failed to deal with country information concerning laws targeting transgender persons in Malaysia
  2. 2 Whether Tribunal failed to take into account a relevant consideration regarding real risk of mental harm sufficient to constitute significant harm

Ratio Decidendi

Jurisdictional error was not established because the Tribunal considered the relevant country information and submissions regarding the treatment of transgender persons in Malaysia, applied the definition of significant harm including mental harm, and undertook a comprehensive assessment. Therefore, the FCCA was correct in dismissing the judicial review application; the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal, to be assessed in default of agreement in accordance with the court's Costs Practice Note (GPN-COSTS).