Levy, Guitta v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1666

Levy, Guitta v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1666

On a fair reading of the RRT's reasons, the Tribunal did not apply a legal test requiring risk of actual physical injury. It considered the social harassment and threatening telephone calls cumulatively, found that the calls were unlikely to be acted upon and that the anxiety and discrimination were not sufficient as a matter of fact and degree to constitute persecution, and that conclusion was open to it. The RRT asked itself the correct questions about well-founded fear and persecution, and it sufficiently considered and made findings about the applicant's anxiety and the impact of threats and abuse. No reviewable error under ss 420 or 430 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Migration Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Application for an Order of Review in the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'persecution' 'well Founded Fear' 'mixed Marriage' 'state Protection' 'tribunal Reasons' 'material Findings of Fact' 'substantial Justice and Merits']
['migration Law' 'refugee Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'persecution' 'well Founded Fear' 'mixed Marriage' 'state Protection' 'tribunal Reasons' 'material Findings of Fact' 'substantial Justice and Merits']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Application for an Order of Review in the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred in determining that the applicant's harassment, threats and anxiety did not amount to persecution within the meaning of the Convention." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal wrongly applied a test requiring risk of actual physical injury before persecution could be established.' "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal applied the wrong test in determining whether the applicant's fear of persecution was well-founded." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to set out findings on material questions of fact as required by s 430(1)(c) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to act according to substantial justice and the merits of the case as required by s 420(2)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

On a fair reading of the RRT's reasons, the Tribunal did not apply a legal test requiring risk of actual physical injury. It considered the social harassment and threatening telephone calls cumulatively, found that the calls were unlikely to be acted upon and that the anxiety and discrimination were not sufficient as a matter of fact and degree to constitute persecution, and that conclusion was open to it. The RRT asked itself the correct questions about well-founded fear and persecution, and it sufficiently considered and made findings about the applicant's anxiety and the impact of threats and abuse. No reviewable error under ss 420 or 430 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an order of review is dismissed with costs.']