Celik v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1769

Celik v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1769

On a fair reading of the Refugee Review Tribunal's reasons, it assessed each applicant by reference to their actual circumstances and the cumulative grounds advanced, made credibility and factual findings that were open on the material, and did not reveal any material or reviewable failure to consider evidence, apply the real chance test, or address claimed risks. The identified omissions concerning some findings were either not established or were minor and immaterial to the overall assessment. Each application therefore failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Migration Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions / Federal Court Judgment on Applications for Orders of Review
Outcome
Applications dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['refugee Status' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'convention Reasons' 'kurdish Ethnicity' 'alevi Religion' 'political Opinion' 'refugee Review Tribunal Reasons' 'real Chance Test' 'cumulative Grounds of Persecution']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law'] ['refugee Status' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'convention Reasons' 'kurdish Ethnicity' 'alevi Religion' 'political Opinion' 'refugee Review Tribunal Reasons' 'real Chance Test' 'cumulative Grounds of Persecution']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions / Federal Court Judgment on Applications for Orders of Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to consider the cumulative effect of the applicants' Kurdish ethnicity, Alevi religion and claimed political opinion or HADEP involvement." "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to make findings on evidence given by the applicants' aunt and uncle." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred in applying the real chance test by failing to ask what if it was wrong about its factual findings.' "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to make material findings on Ibocan Celik's repeated questioning by police and on claimed corroborative evidence." "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred in relation to Ibocan Celik's claim concerning Turkish military service." "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to make material findings on Sevda Celik's claims about Nevroz celebrations and erred in assessing risk from Kurdish ethnicity." 'Whether any established errors were reviewable under Part VIII of the Migration Act 1958.']

Ratio Decidendi

On a fair reading of the Refugee Review Tribunal's reasons, it assessed each applicant by reference to their actual circumstances and the cumulative grounds advanced, made credibility and factual findings that were open on the material, and did not reveal any material or reviewable failure to consider evidence, apply the real chance test, or address claimed risks. The identified omissions concerning some findings were either not established or were minor and immaterial to the overall assessment. Each application therefore failed.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The applications be dismissed with costs.']