1709237 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm from his wife's family due to a house ownership dispute and from his cousin's wife's family over personal matters. He alleged threats of death and reputational damage leading to job loss and marital breakdown, prompting his departure from Lebanon. The applicant also raised issues regarding his employment in another country and his subsequent arrival in Australia on a visitor visa.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires a well-founded fear of persecution, or under section 36(2)(aa), which concerns complementary protection due to a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility, the consistency of his claims, and the evidence provided, including country information and departmental guidelines.

The Tribunal found the applicant's claims to be inconsistent, particularly concerning the ownership of the house and the circumstances of his divorce. The lack of documentation to support his ownership claims and the inconsistencies in his account of events led the Tribunal to question his credibility. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant did not provide a post-hearing response to address these issues. Applying the principles of Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Tribunal considered the relevant guidelines and country information. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.