Egu17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

The applicant, a citizen of Malaysia, sought judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming a decision of the delegate of the Minister (delegate) to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant raised seven grounds of review in his application, none of which identified an error of law or procedure on the part of the Tribunal. The applicant claimed that he had worked with loan sharks in Malaysia and had been threatened with death if he left, and that if he returned to Malaysia he would be killed. The Tribunal found the applicant’s claims to be lacking in key details and not supported by evidence, and did not accept that the applicant faced a real chance of serious harm in Malaysia. The Court dismissed the application on the basis that no jurisdictional error was identified by the application. The Court noted that the applicant had not availed himself of the opportunity to file an amended application or to file written submissions, and that he had resiled from several of the grounds in his application on the basis that he had not prepared them. The Court found that the Tribunal had fairly considered the applicant’s claims and that the Tribunal’s decision did not disclose any jurisdictional error. The Court made an order that the applicant pay the Minister’s costs of the application fixed in the sum of $5,000.