2002870 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an adult male applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant, a Lebanese citizen, claimed he had suffered a head injury in 2015 which significantly impacted his cognitive abilities, rendering him unable to work and fearful of going out. He also had a pre-existing diagnosis of epilepsy and a developmental disability. The Tribunal allowed the applicant to appear with his mother, who acts as his carer, given his limited capacity to provide testimony.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Australia had protection obligations towards the applicant. This involved assessing whether he met the criteria for being a refugee or, alternatively, whether he qualified for complementary protection due to a real risk of suffering significant harm if returned to Lebanon. The Tribunal was required to consider medical evidence regarding the applicant's cognitive and developmental conditions, his personal account of his experiences, and country information pertaining to the situation in Lebanon.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant might not meet the strict definition of a refugee, he did satisfy the criteria for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958*. The Tribunal found substantial grounds to believe that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of his removal to Lebanon, the applicant faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. This conclusion was informed by the applicant's profound disabilities, his inability to care for himself, and the limited facilities and support available in Lebanon for individuals with such conditions, which could lead to a lack of care and dignity.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act*.