1930715 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, a national of Thailand, claimed to fear persecution due to being part of a particular social group – specifically, individuals threatened with violence, including killing and physical assault, and whose property had been subjected to an arson attack, because they refused to sell their land as demanded by influential local figures. The applicant contended that they would not receive adequate protection from the Thai state. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa.

The core legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of membership in a particular social group, and whether the Thai state could offer effective protection. This required the court to consider the nature of the claimed particular social group and assess the applicant's subjective fear against objective evidence of the risk of harm and the availability and effectiveness of state protection in Thailand.

The court affirmed the Tribunal's findings. It was held that the Tribunal had correctly identified the particular social group as persons threatened for refusing to sell land as demanded by influential local figures, and that the applicant's fear of killing, physical assault, and arson was well-founded. Crucially, the Tribunal had also reasonably concluded that the Thai state was unable or unwilling to offer effective protection to the applicant in this specific context, given the nature of the threats and the influence of the perpetrators. The court found no error in the Tribunal's assessment of the evidence and its application of the relevant legal principles concerning protection visas.