1821406 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an individual who claimed to fear harm from a former business partner in Thailand. The applicant alleged that the former partner had taken over their shared business, lodged a fake police complaint, and created fraudulent ownership documents, resulting in the applicant losing all their money. The applicant further claimed that the police could not assist due to the former partner's connections. The applicant did not appear before the Tribunal or provide further written evidence, relying solely on the information provided to the Department.

The key issues before the Tribunal were to make findings of fact regarding the incidents described by the applicant and to determine whether there was a real chance of serious harm or a real risk of significant harm if the applicant were to return to Thailand. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility, acknowledging the inherent difficulties in such assessments, particularly with asylum seekers, and the guidance provided by case law and the UNHCR Handbook. However, the Tribunal was not obliged to accept claims uncritically or to seek out evidence to support the applicant's case.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims. Given the applicant's failure to appear before the Tribunal or provide further information, and the lack of corroborating evidence, the Tribunal was unable to make favourable findings of fact regarding the alleged persecution. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa.

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