1830724 (Refugee)

The applicant, a woman from China, sought a protection visa, claiming she feared persecution on return to China due to her Christian religion. She also claimed her daughter would be denied household registration as she was unmarried. The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, including assessing the credibility of her claims and whether she faced a real risk of significant harm upon return to China.

The court found the applicant's claims lacked credibility. Her decision to obtain a Chinese passport in April 2017, prior to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, was considered a strong indication that she did not fear returning to China at that time. The court noted inconsistencies in her explanations for not returning, including a claim that her parents advised her against it due to religious repression, which was contradicted by her earlier actions and statements. Furthermore, her failure to seek protection until after her de facto partner was detained in September 2018 suggested her application was motivated by a desire to remain in Australia rather than a genuine fear of returning. The court also considered the secondary applicant's migration history as indicative of a determination to remain in Australia.

The court affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm on return to China. The applicant's inconsistent evidence and failure to provide honest explanations for her actions and delays in applying for protection led the court to conclude that her claims were likely concocted to support her protection application.