BRB15 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, BRB15, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration. The dispute concerned the applicant's eligibility for a protection visa, specifically whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had adequately considered all relevant provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) in its assessment. The matter came before Emmett J of the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Tribunal had failed to consider section 91R(3) of the *Migration Act 1958* when determining the applicant's protection visa application. The Court was also required to consider the Tribunal's approach to the complementary protection provisions and whether the applicant's claims for protection were properly assessed in light of those provisions and the evidence presented.

Emmett J adopted the written submissions of the first respondent, which clarified that section 91R of the Act, concerning the definition of 'persecution', was relevant only to the criterion for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) and not to the complementary protection criterion. The Tribunal had not referred to section 91R(3) because it was not relevant to the complementary protection assessment. The applicant's sole claim for protection was fear of harm in China due to his practice of Christianity there, not as a consequence of his church attendance in Australia. The Tribunal's finding that the applicant did not satisfy section 36(2)(aa) was therefore considered inevitable, as the applicant had not established he was a genuine Christian or had any church involvement in China.

The Court found that the Tribunal had not erred in its consideration of the relevant provisions. The application for judicial review was dismissed.