1935768 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an individual who claimed to fear persecution in Kenya due to his religion as a practising Christian. The applicant had resided in Kenya until 2000, then in another country until 2015, before returning to Kenya until 2016, when he came to Australia. He stated that his family resided in Nairobi and that he had limited aptitude for Kenyan languages other than English, no work experience, and no connections elsewhere in Kenya, raising concerns about isolation and his ability to support himself if returned.

The court was required to determine two primary issues. Firstly, whether there was a real chance that the applicant would be persecuted in Kenya for one of the five reasons specified in section 5J(1)(a) of the Act, for the purposes of section 36(2)(a). Secondly, if the first criterion was not met, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant's removal to Kenya, there was a real risk that he would suffer significant harm, pursuant to section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The court considered the applicant's claims in light of the relevant legislative provisions, including the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). It noted that there were no specific country information assessments for Kenya available for consideration. Ultimately, the court found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Act, as there was no suggestion that he met the requirements based on membership of a family unit of a person who satisfied section 36(2)(a) or (aa). The decision under review was affirmed.