1715901 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision by the Minister to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm from the political and economic conditions and unemployment in their home country. A new claim of fear of harm from an illegal money lender was raised at the hearing, stemming from a loan taken out to meet business costs, which allegedly resulted in damage to property and threats.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, and whether the Minister's decision was affected by error. Specifically, the court had to consider the applicant's credibility, particularly in relation to the new claim concerning the money lender, and whether an adverse inference could be drawn from the applicant's failure to provide a reasonable explanation for raising this claim late. The court also had to assess the applicant's overall claim in light of country information and the possibility of relocation.

The court found that while the applicant provided detailed and consistent evidence regarding their business and the loan, the evidence concerning the alleged damage to property and threats from the money lender was brief and vague. The court noted that the applicant's brother had experienced an approach but no harm from a similar lender in their home country. Furthermore, the applicant had made no attempt to repay the loan while working in Australia. Considering the applicant's relatively common name, change of appearance, and the possibility of relocation, the court concluded that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution. The court affirmed the decision under review.