MZAPB v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1393

MZAPB v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1393

The appeal failed because the appellant did not establish that the Tribunal failed to consider a substantial argument relying on established facts. The Tribunal accepted a real chance of serious harm in Parachinar but addressed the articulated relocation issues concerning Islamabad and Rawalpindi, including sectarian risk, family support, employment and the appellant's circumstances. The particular asserted difficulty of relocating the whole family unit was not raised by the appellant's evidence as an established factual integer requiring separate determination. Accordingly, the Tribunal did not fail to exercise its review jurisdiction and the Federal Circuit Court made no error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision Concerning Refusal of a Protection Visa / Federal Court Appeal From MZAPB V Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1553
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'internal Relocation' 'reasonableness of Relocation' 'failure to Address Integers of Claim' 'natural Justice']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'internal Relocation' 'reasonableness of Relocation' 'failure to Address Integers of Claim' 'natural Justice']

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 Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision Concerning Refusal of a Protection Visa / Federal Court Appeal From MZAPB V Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1553

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a well-founded fear of persecution may be confined to a region of a country for protection visa purposes.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to address all integers of the appellant's claim that relocation within Pakistan to Islamabad or Rawalpindi was unreasonable." "Whether the Tribunal was required to consider the practical reality of relocation of the appellant's wife and six children as a family unit." "Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in rejecting the appellant's judicial review ground."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the appellant did not establish that the Tribunal failed to consider a substantial argument relying on established facts. The Tribunal accepted a real chance of serious harm in Parachinar but addressed the articulated relocation issues concerning Islamabad and Rawalpindi, including sectarian risk, family support, employment and the appellant's circumstances. The particular asserted difficulty of relocating the whole family unit was not raised by the appellant's evidence as an established factual integer requiring separate determination. Accordingly, the Tribunal did not fail to exercise its review jurisdiction and the Federal Circuit Court made no error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal, to be taxed if not agreed."]