SZNQS v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 637

SZNQS v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 637

The appeal was dismissed because no information engaging s 424A was identified and none was apparent; the Tribunal's reasoning, disbelief of the Appellant's claims and reliance on country information did not attract s 424A. The Tribunal did not ignore persecution or harm but considered and rejected the Appellant's factual claims as false. Leave to raise a new s 91R argument was refused because it had no factual substance in light of the Tribunal's adverse factual findings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of Protection Visa
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'section 424 a Disclosure Obligations' 'section 424 AA Oral Invitation Procedure' 'complementary Protection' 'unreasonableness' 'leave to Raise New Argument on Appeal']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'section 424 a Disclosure Obligations' 'section 424 AA Oral Invitation Procedure' 'complementary Protection' 'unreasonableness' 'leave to Raise New Argument on Appeal']

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

Migration Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of Protection Visa

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s 424A, read with s 424AA, by not giving clear particulars of information that may be a reason for affirming the delegate's decision and inviting comment or response." 'Whether the Tribunal acted manifestly unreasonably or ignored persecution and harm in terms of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether leave should be granted to raise for the first time on appeal an argument concerning s 91R.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because no information engaging s 424A was identified and none was apparent; the Tribunal's reasoning, disbelief of the Appellant's claims and reliance on country information did not attract s 424A. The Tribunal did not ignore persecution or harm but considered and rejected the Appellant's factual claims as false. Leave to raise a new s 91R argument was refused because it had no factual substance in light of the Tribunal's adverse factual findings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The Appellant is to pay the costs of the First Respondent.']