SZTMQ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 535

SZTMQ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 535

As the Tribunal made adverse factual findings against the appellant and found he had not experienced any harm and was not exposed to a real risk of significant harm, it was not required to consider state protection issues under s 36(2B)(b); no error was disclosed in the Tribunal's approach, and the appeal must fail.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'state Protection' 'judicial Review']
['migration Law'] ['refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'state Protection' 'judicial Review']

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 / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal applied an incorrect test of 'reasonable level' of state protection instead of 'real risk of significant harm' under s 36(2B)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)" 'Whether the Tribunal failed to consider complementary protection claims as a whole under s 36(2)(aa)' 'Whether the Tribunal was required to consider s 36(2B)(b)']

Ratio Decidendi

As the Tribunal made adverse factual findings against the appellant and found he had not experienced any harm and was not exposed to a real risk of significant harm, it was not required to consider state protection issues under s 36(2B)(b); no error was disclosed in the Tribunal's approach, and the appeal must fail.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' 'The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent, to be taxed if not agreed.']