SZSYG v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

The appellant, a Tamil male who had lived in Sri Lanka, appealed a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which had affirmed the refusal of a Protection visa. The Tribunal had accepted the appellant's background of fear and the context of the civil war in Sri Lanka, but found that after June 2008, the appellant had experienced no further harm despite his continued residence in Sri Lanka until his departure for Australia in 2012. The appellant claimed to have avoided harm by living discreetly, but the Tribunal found this to be inconsistent with his evidence of a largely unbroken work history, study and his mother's continued public work in her grocery store. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the appellant's support for the TNA had exposed him to any harm of any nature since June 2008. The appellant's claim of involvement with the TNA was further undermined by the fact that he did not mention his involvement as a reason for leaving Sri Lanka in his entry interview on 10 July 2012. The appellant's reliance on a letter of support from a person from the Trincomalee Urban Council, which was dated 24 July 2012, was also found to be unpersuasive as it was drafted with the Protection visa application in mind. The appellant's uncle's connections in the TNA also suggested that such a letter may not be difficult to source. The appellant argued that the Tribunal had fallen into jurisdictional error by failing to make certain inquiries or inviting him to comment. However, the court found that the Tribunal had not fallen into jurisdictional error and dismissed the appeal. The appellant was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs and the name of the second respondent was changed to read "Administrative Appeals Tribunal".