EMP144 v The Republic of Nauru

This case involved an appeal as of right to the High Court of Australia from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Nauru. The appellant, who sought refugee status or complementary protection under Nauru's Refugees Convention Act 2012, had his application rejected by the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Border Control, a decision affirmed by the Refugee Status Review Tribunal and subsequently by the Supreme Court of Nauru. The core of the dispute concerned whether the appellant qualified for protection, with the Tribunal finding that while he had suffered persecution, he could reasonably relocate within his country of origin, Nepal.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the Tribunal erred in its assessment of the appellant's claim for complementary protection by applying an internal relocation test, whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant factors regarding the appellant's ability to relocate, and whether procedural fairness was afforded to the appellant in relation to the issue of internal relocation. Specifically, the appellant argued that the Tribunal overlooked his concerns about safety, access to education and employment, lack of professional skills, and ongoing fears for his family's safety, and that he was not given an opportunity to respond to the relocation issue.

The High Court, comprising Kiefel CJ, Gageler and Nettle JJ, dismissed the appeal. Their Honours reasoned that the Tribunal's approach of considering internal relocation was appropriate in assessing claims for complementary protection. They found that the Tribunal had not failed to take into account all relevant matters, including the appellant's circumstances, and that procedural fairness had been observed. The Supreme Court of Nauru's affirmation of the Tribunal's decision was upheld. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.