Avh15 v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection

The applicant, a citizen of Sri Lanka, sought judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) affirming the delegate's refusal to grant him a protection visa. The applicant arrived in Australia in August 2012 and subsequently applied for a protection visa. The delegate refused the application, and the applicant sought review by the RRT. The RRT affirmed the delegate's decision after the applicant failed to attend his scheduled hearing. The applicant then commenced judicial review proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the RRT had erred in law by proceeding to make a decision on the review without further action to allow the applicant to appear before it, despite the applicant's failure to attend the scheduled hearing. This involved considering the RRT's obligations under section 426A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and whether the RRT had adequately considered the applicant's claims and the credibility of those claims when the applicant was not present to have them tested.

Emmett J found that the RRT had not erred in law. The court noted that the RRT had provided the applicant with notice of the hearing, informed him of the implications of section 426A, and sent SMS reminders. The RRT also considered that the applicant's claims were inconsistent and had changed over time, and that his credibility could not be tested in his absence. The RRT had regard to country information and was not satisfied that the applicant would face a real chance of serious harm. Therefore, the RRT was entitled to proceed with its decision without further action to allow the applicant to appear. The application for judicial review was dismissed.