2302026 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Indian national, sought review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse her application for a protection visa. The applicant claimed to be a member of a particular social group, namely divorced women and single mothers in India who are victims of gender-based violence, and that she feared persecution if returned to India due to her experiences of forced pregnancy terminations and lack of access to medical care and mental health support.

The Federal Court was required to determine whether the applicant's claimed particular social group was a valid one for the purposes of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), and whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a reason specified in section 5 of the Act, considering the availability of state protection and the feasibility of internal relocation within India.

Justice Ermert found that the applicant's asserted particular social group, defined by the intersection of being a divorced woman, a single mother, and a victim of gender-based violence, was a valid particular social group. The Court reasoned that the group was defined by a common characteristic and was socially distinct in India. Furthermore, the Court concluded that the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution, as the evidence demonstrated that state protection was unlikely to be available to her and that internal relocation would not be a reasonable or effective option given her circumstances and the nature of the harm she feared.

Consequently, the Court set aside the original decision and remitted the application for a protection visa to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for redetermination.