1621445 (Refugee)

The applicant, a man from Bangladesh, sought a Protection visa, claiming he feared harm from his ex-wife and her influential relatives should he be returned to Bangladesh. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution or significant harm. The decision was made by Melissa McAdam.

The court was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa, specifically whether he had a well-founded fear of persecution under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), or alternatively, if he faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa). The court also considered the meaning of "significant harm" as defined in sections 36(2A) and (2B) of the Act.

The court considered the applicant's account of his relationship with his wife, including allegations of physical and verbal abuse, and threats made by his wife and her brother. The applicant claimed his wife's brother had threatened his family in Bangladesh and that his wife's cousin, who was in the Bengali Armed Forces, could be used to harm him. The court noted inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence, particularly regarding his wife's actions and motivations concerning her Permanent Residency application, and the timing and nature of the threats. The court also took into account Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines and country information. Ultimately, the court found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm.

The decision under review was affirmed, meaning the applicant's Protection visa application was refused.