SZTMD v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 150

SZTMD v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 150

The proposed grounds were not arguable. From the Tribunal's reasons and s 430(1), the Court drew the Yusuf inference that the Tribunal did not regard the PAM3 guidelines or country information as material or relevant, and the applicant identified no specific relevant guideline or country information that should have been considered. The s 420 argument failed for the same reason and because s 420 does not prescribe a procedure. The complementary protection ground failed because the Tribunal had considered the risks of the applicant being perceived as a traitor by CNDD-FDD, Imbonerakure, the Government of Burundi, opposition parties, other Tutsis and the community, and had considered his...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Judgment Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Application to Amend Application for Leave to Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal; First Respondent's Application to Lead Fresh Evidence
Outcome
Application to amend the application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; first respondent's application to lead fresh evidence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'ministerial Directions Under S 499' 'country Information' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'fresh Grounds on Appeal' 'fresh Evidence' 'statement of Reasons']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'ministerial Directions Under S 499' 'country Information' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'fresh Grounds on Appeal' 'fresh Evidence' 'statement of Reasons']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Judgment Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Application to Amend Application for Leave to Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal; First Respondent's Application to Lead Fresh Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be permitted to amend and advance fresh grounds on an application for leave to appeal.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court's summary dismissal at a show cause hearing." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to comply with Ministerial Direction No. 56 by not considering PAM3 guidelines or Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade country information assessments.' 'Whether any alleged failure to consider the guidelines or country information infringed s 420(2)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to consider whether the applicant could be perceived as a traitor by both Tutsi and Hutu groups and thereby face a real risk of significant harm.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider evidence of the applicant's post-traumatic stress, anxiety, grief and depression in relation to complementary protection."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed grounds were not arguable. From the Tribunal's reasons and s 430(1), the Court drew the Yusuf inference that the Tribunal did not regard the PAM3 guidelines or country information as material or relevant, and the applicant identified no specific relevant guideline or country information that should have been considered. The s 420 argument failed for the same reason and because s 420 does not prescribe a procedure. The complementary protection ground failed because the Tribunal had considered the risks of the applicant being perceived as a traitor by CNDD-FDD, Imbonerakure, the Government of Burundi, opposition parties, other Tutsis and the community, and had considered his...

Court Disposition

Application to amend the application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; first respondent's application to lead fresh evidence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application to amend the application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.' 'The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.' "The first respondent's application to lead fresh evidence be dismissed."]