1812573 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the protection visa applications of [Mrs A] and [Mr B], and their minor child [Master C]. The applicants, who are Vietnamese nationals, claimed they feared persecution in Vietnam due to their membership in a particular social group, specifically [Mrs A]'s extended family, and their political opinions. The Tribunal found that Vietnam was the applicants' receiving country.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants were refugees within the meaning of section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) or whether they met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. This involved assessing whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Vietnam, the applicants faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. The Tribunal also considered the application of [Master C] as a member of the same family unit as his parents.

The Tribunal found that the evidence provided by [Mrs A] and [Mr B] was credible and persuasive, detailing past experiences of systemic discrimination and articulating their fears of persecution. However, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicants met the criteria for being a refugee under section 36(2)(a) or the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). Despite this, the Tribunal acknowledged that [Master C] was a member of the same family unit as [Mrs A].

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with directions that the first and second applicants ( [Mrs A] and [Mr B] ) each satisfy section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act*, and that the third applicant ( [Master C] ) satisfies section 36(2)(b)(i) on the basis of membership of the same family unit as the first applicant.