2105463 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a non-citizen from China. The applicant claimed to have been persecuted by a property developer after his family purchased a substandard apartment, alleging threats, violence against his father, and inaction by local governments. The decision under review was made by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Andrew Verduci.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This required determining if the applicant was a refugee or a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm if returned to their country of origin, or if they were a family member of such a person. The Tribunal was also required to consider relevant guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the applicant was very limited, as he provided no additional information beyond what was in the original delegate's decision, despite opportunities to do so. Consequently, the Tribunal did not accept the applicant's claims regarding the purchase of a substandard apartment, the seeking of compensation, or the subsequent harassment and violence, including the alleged beating of his father. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a real chance of serious harm or a real risk of significant harm, and therefore did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act, nor on the basis of being a family member.

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