SZDCD v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 326
The lack of access to adequate medical treatment in Bangladesh, without evidence of arbitrary conduct or responsibility for deprivation of life, does not constitute a risk of 'arbitrary deprivation of life' under s 36(2A)(a); the FCCA judge's error regarding subjective intent did not affect the outcome as the Tribunal’s finding did not rely on intent.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['complementary Protection' 'arbitrary Deprivation of Life' 'access to Medical Treatment' 'judicial Review']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Proper construction of ss 36(2)(aa) and 36(2A)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to complementary protection' "Whether the lack of adequate access to medical treatment constitutes significant harm and is 'arbitrary'" 'Whether actual subjective intent to arbitrarily deprive life is required by s 36(2A)(a)']
Ratio Decidendi
The lack of access to adequate medical treatment in Bangladesh, without evidence of arbitrary conduct or responsibility for deprivation of life, does not constitute a risk of 'arbitrary deprivation of life' under s 36(2A)(a); the FCCA judge's error regarding subjective intent did not affect the outcome as the Tribunal’s finding did not rely on intent.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment