SZMYN v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2009] FCA 840

SZMYN v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2009] FCA 840

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant identified no error in the Federal Magistrates Court's conclusion that the Tribunal had correctly applied relocation principles, had not failed to consider serious harm or religious persecution, had complied with s 430 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and had not erred in its use of country information or displayed apprehended bias. The new ground concerning adverse information also failed because the appellant had an opportunity to comment on the country information relied on, and the Tribunal was required to reach its own positive satisfaction rather than merely act on evidence that could support refugee status.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Magistrates Court Dismissing an Application for Constitutional Writs Directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal / Appeal in the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'constitutional Writs' 'jurisdictional Error' 'relocation Within Country of Nationality' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'country Information' 'apprehended Bias']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'refugee Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'constitutional Writs' 'jurisdictional Error' 'relocation Within Country of Nationality' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'country Information' 'apprehended Bias']

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

Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Magistrates Court Dismissing an Application for Constitutional Writs Directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal / Appeal in the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Magistrates Court erred in dismissing the appellant's application for constitutional writs directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal." 'Whether the Tribunal failed to consider properly whether the appellant would suffer serious harm under s 91R(2) or s 91R(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) if required to relocate in India.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the appellant could avoid localised harm by relocating within India.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to make findings or give reasons about claimed persecution based on religion or political opinion.' 'Whether the Tribunal improperly used country information or was affected by apprehended bias.' 'Whether the appellant should be permitted to rely on a new ground alleging lack of opportunity to comment on adverse information and that the Tribunal could have found him to be a refugee.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant identified no error in the Federal Magistrates Court's conclusion that the Tribunal had correctly applied relocation principles, had not failed to consider serious harm or religious persecution, had complied with s 430 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and had not erred in its use of country information or displayed apprehended bias. The new ground concerning adverse information also failed because the appellant had an opportunity to comment on the country information relied on, and the Tribunal was required to reach its own positive satisfaction rather than merely act on evidence that could support refugee status.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal."]