1502278 (Refugee)

The applicant, who sought a protection visa, claimed to fear harm upon return to Fiji due to domestic violence perpetrated by his wife and her relatives. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the applicant's claims, which included allegations of being assaulted and threatened by his wife's relatives after an extramarital affair was discovered, leading to his departure from Fiji. The Tribunal was required to assess whether these claims established Australia's protection obligations under the relevant legislation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or alternatively, whether he faced a real risk of significant harm amounting to complementary protection, as contemplated by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and associated policy guidelines. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the alleged domestic violence and threats constituted persecution or significant harm that engaged Australia's protection obligations.

The Tribunal, in its reasoning, noted inconsistencies and a lack of corroboration in the applicant's account, including a significant chronological error in his claimed marriage date. While acknowledging the applicant's stated fear and the emotional distress he claimed to have suffered, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the evidence presented established a real chance of significant harm or persecution upon return to Fiji. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), nor the alternative criteria under sections 36(2)(b) or (c).

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant protection visas.