1713796 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by four applicants from Zimbabwe. The first applicant claimed she would face harm upon return to Zimbabwe due to her family's association with a homosexual brother, fearing shame, ridicule, ostracism from her family, church, and community, and potential arrest by state security agents. The second and third applicants, her children, relied on their membership in the same family unit. The fourth applicant, the first applicant's sister, also sought protection. The delegate of the Minister refused the protection visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was a real chance the applicants would suffer serious harm if returned to Zimbabwe, either due to their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of their removal, they faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. This involved considering the definition of "significant harm" and the circumstances under which a person would not be considered to face such a risk, as well as the mandatory considerations under Ministerial Direction No. 84.

The Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. It found that the second and third applicants were members of the same family unit as the first applicant. The Tribunal directed that the first and fourth applicants satisfy the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958*, and that the other applicants satisfy the criterion under s.36(2)(b)(i) of the Act based on their membership in the same family unit as the first applicant.