AR v IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL [2017] NZHC 2982

AR v IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL [2017] NZHC 2982

Leave to appeal was refused because no question of law of general or public importance was identified: the law on credibility assessment is settled by higher courts; the applicant's criticisms did not raise a novel legal issue suitable for appellate determination; the affidavit alleging bias was not fresh or cogent and the Tribunal's adverse credibility finding stood and was accepted by the applicant.

Citation
[2017] NZHC 2982
Parties
Appellant: AR; First Respondent: Immigration and Protection Tribunal; Second Respondent: Refugee and Protection Officer
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
4 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee and Protected Person Status Appeal and Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal; High Court Dismissed Appeal and Judicial Review and Now Dismissed Leave Application
Outcome
Application to adduce further evidence dismissed; application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Leave to Appeal, Judicial Review, Bias/alleged Procedural Unfairness
Immigration Law Administrative Law Refugee Law Credibility Assessment Leave to Appeal Judicial Review Bias/alleged Procedural Unfairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AR

Appellant

Immigration and Protection Tribunal

First Respondent

Refugee and Protection Officer

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee and Protected Person Status Appeal and Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal; High Court Dismissed Appeal and Judicial Review and Now Dismissed Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed appeal raises a question of law of general or public importance warranting leave to appeal
  2. 2 Whether the law on credibility assessment is unsettled or requires a uniform methodology
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence (affidavit alleging bias) should be admitted at this stage

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no question of law of general or public importance was identified: the law on credibility assessment is settled by higher courts; the applicant's criticisms did not raise a novel legal issue suitable for appellate determination; the affidavit alleging bias was not fresh or cogent and the Tribunal's adverse credibility finding stood and was accepted by the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application to adduce further evidence dismissed; application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application to adduce further evidence (affidavit sworn 25 September 2017) dismissed
  • Application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal dismissed