1703297 (Refugee)

The applicants, citizens of the People's Republic of China, sought review of a decision by the delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse their applications for a protection visa. The applicants had overstayed their visas in Australia and claimed to fear persecution upon return to China due to land expropriation by village officials, resulting in a loss of livelihood and economic hardship. The second applicant was the only one to attend the Tribunal hearing, where additional claims were made, including that the mother-in-law had been beaten by authorities.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicants had established a genuine fear of persecution on return to China, and whether the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visas was affected by error. Specifically, the court was required to consider the credibility of the applicants' claims, particularly in light of inconsistencies and the timing of events, and to assess whether the evidence presented supported a well-founded fear of harm.

The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding significant credibility issues with the applicants' claims. The applicant's evidence regarding the timing of the land expropriation was inconsistent with his departure from China, and his claims of involvement in protests in 2014 were contradicted by his presence in Australia at that time. The court noted that the applicant's assertion of providing materials for a protest was unsubstantiated. Furthermore, the delegate was not satisfied that the mother's land was acquired by authorities or that the applicant could not relocate within China, given his demonstrated resourcefulness. Consequently, the court was not satisfied that the applicants faced a real chance of suffering significant harm on return to China.

The decision under review was affirmed.