1816285 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, sought a Protection visa to remain in Australia, primarily due to concerns about future employment prospects upon return to Fiji. The applicant had been in Australia for approximately three years, assisting a terminally ill stepfather, and feared that changes in his industry and his extended absence would prevent him from finding work in Fiji. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa, specifically considering both the refugee criterion and the complementary protection criterion.

The court's reasoning focused on assessing the applicant's claims against the relevant legislative provisions. It was established that Fiji was the receiving country for the applicant. The Tribunal considered the applicant's stated fear of not finding employment in Fiji due to his absence and industry changes. However, the court found that the applicant did not satisfy the definition of a refugee under section 5H of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), as his claims did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Furthermore, the court determined that the applicant did not meet the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act, which requires a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a Protection visa, as he did not meet the refugee criterion or the complementary protection criterion, nor was he a family member of someone who did. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.