S253 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 458

S253 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 458

The appeal failed because the appellants' first ground misread the Tribunal's reasons: the Tribunal accepted central aspects of the husband's account and found fabricated only the claim that the LTTE was looking for him because of information he provided about ten years earlier. The second ground also failed because consideration of internal relocation was required, did not amount to forcing the appellants to live in Colombo, and no error was shown in the Tribunal's conclusion that the husband, a textile worker who had previously lived and worked in Colombo, could reasonably relocate there with his family and be safe from the LTTE.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Refusing Protection Visas / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'internal Flight Option' 'relocation Within Country of Nationality']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law'] ['protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'internal Flight Option' 'relocation Within Country of Nationality']

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

Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Refusing Protection Visas / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Magistrate erred in rejecting the contention that the Tribunal's finding that claims were fabricated was procedurally unfair and amounted to legal error." 'Whether the Federal Magistrate erred by failing to consider the argument that the Tribunal unreasonably and unfairly forced relocation to Colombo on the appellants.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in concluding that the appellants could reasonably relocate to Colombo and would be safe from the LTTE there.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the appellants' first ground misread the Tribunal's reasons: the Tribunal accepted central aspects of the husband's account and found fabricated only the claim that the LTTE was looking for him because of information he provided about ten years earlier. The second ground also failed because consideration of internal relocation was required, did not amount to forcing the appellants to live in Colombo, and no error was shown in the Tribunal's conclusion that the husband, a textile worker who had previously lived and worked in Colombo, could reasonably relocate there with his family and be safe from the LTTE.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The adult appellants pay the respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $4200."]