APD15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

In the case of APD15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, the applicant, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China, sought leave to appeal against the Federal Circuit Court’s decision to reject his application for protection visa. The applicant also sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent his immediate removal from Australia. The Federal Circuit Court was asked to determine whether the application for leave to appeal and the application for interlocutory relief had arguable merit.

The central issue before the court was whether the applicant had established an arguable case for leave to appeal. Specifically, the court had to consider if the applicant could demonstrate that the primary judge had erred in his assessment of the International Treaties Obligations, particularly in light of the Data Breach incident. The applicant argued that the primary judge should have asked himself a different question and should have considered the risk of serious harm to the applicant if returned to China.

The court found that the applicant had not established an arguable case for leave to appeal. The court held that the primary judge had appropriately considered the International Treaties Obligations and the Data Breach incident in the context of the applicant's claim. The court further found that the primary judge had indeed considered the risk of serious harm to the applicant but had concluded that the risk was not of a sufficient degree to merit a protection visa. Consequently, the court dismissed both the application for leave to appeal and the application for interlocutory relief. The court also ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the application to the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection.