Kyaing v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1495

Kyaing v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1495

The Tribunal did not find that the applicant was a 'repetitive demonstrator' in the sense required by the independent report; its finding that the applicant would be of only slight concern to Burmese authorities and not face real chance of persecution was open on the evidence and discloses no error of law under the Migration Act. The Tribunal correctly concluded that any potential interrogation, detention, or monitoring would not constitute persecution, especially given the context in Burma.

Parties
Applicant: Sein Kyaing; Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Hearing and Judgment on Judicial Review
Outcome
Application dismissed. Applicant to pay costs of Respondent.
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Refugee Status, Judicial Review, Error of Law, Persecution, Burma (myanmar)
Immigration Law Administrative Law Protection Visa Refugee Status Judicial Review Error of Law Persecution Burma (myanmar)

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sein Kyaing

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Hearing and Judgment on Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in law in finding applicant did not face a real chance of persecution in Burma as a result of his activities in Australia
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in its findings or approach concerning 'repetitive demonstrator' status
  3. 3 Whether Tribunal misapplied the law to the facts regarding persecution

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal did not find that the applicant was a 'repetitive demonstrator' in the sense required by the independent report; its finding that the applicant would be of only slight concern to Burmese authorities and not face real chance of persecution was open on the evidence and discloses no error of law under the Migration Act. The Tribunal correctly concluded that any potential interrogation, detention, or monitoring would not constitute persecution, especially given the context in Burma.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. Applicant to pay costs of Respondent.

Orders

  • The Application be dismissed.
  • The Applicant pay the Respondent's costs.