1601769 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for Protection visas by a husband, wife, and their three children, all citizens of China. The applicants claimed they feared harm, primarily due to breaching China's Family Planning Policy, including the risk of forced sterilisation and mental and physical harm. The decision under review was affirmed by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants met the criteria for a Protection visa under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicants satisfied the refugee criterion under s 36(2)(a) of the Act, and alternatively, if they were persons in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under s 36(2)(aa) of the Act. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicants could satisfy the criterion under s 36(2)(c) of the Act.

The Tribunal found that the applicants did not meet the refugee criterion under s 36(2)(a). Furthermore, after considering the evidence, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicants were persons in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under s 36(2)(aa). Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicants were unable to satisfy the criterion set out in s 36(2)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Protection visas.