Thevanathan v MIMA [1998] FCA 1166

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From a Federal Court Review Decision Concerning a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Refusing a Protection Visa / Appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether procedures required by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) or Migration Regulations to be observed were observed by the Refugee Review Tribunal.' "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal's approach to assessing the appellant's credibility involved an error of law." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed properly to consider whether the appellant had a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of imputed political opinion by reason of his age and ethnicity.' 'Whether the primary judge erred in refusing to receive an informal transcript of the Refugee Review Tribunal hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Refugee Review Tribunal made no reviewable legal or procedural error. Its adverse credibility findings were based on inconsistencies and omissions going to central aspects of the appellant's claim, including his alleged arrest and his father's death in custody, and the Tribunal was entitled to find that he could not be believed on material issues. The Tribunal correctly applied the test for a well-founded fear of persecution, considered whether the appellant faced persecution as a young Tamil male or by reason of imputed political opinion, and its findings were open on the material before it. The transcript issue did not affect the result because the transcript could not have caused...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

• ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal."]