SZVVE v MIBP

The case of SZVVE v MIBP involved the applicant, SZVVE, who sought an extension of time and leave to appeal a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). The primary issue was whether the Tribunal had made a jurisdictional error when determining a complementary protection claim by not considering the applicant's subjective fear of significant harm. The applicant argued that the Tribunal should have assessed the subjective element of their fear of harm, rather than just the objective circumstances.

The court examined whether the Tribunal was required to consider the subjective fear of significant harm when determining a complementary protection claim. The court concluded that the Tribunal was not required to delve into the subjective state of mind of the applicant regarding their fear of harm. Instead, the Tribunal's role was to assess the objective circumstances and the likelihood of the applicant suffering significant harm if returned to their country of origin. The court found that the Tribunal had not erred in its approach, as it had correctly focused on the objective circumstances.

The court held that there was no jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision and, consequently, the application for an extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed. The court also ordered the applicant to pay the first respondent's costs. The court found that the applicant's argument did not warrant an extension of time, as it did not present a novel or significant legal issue that had not already been considered by the Tribunal. The court further noted that the applicant's failure to raise the issue in the Court below did not warrant an extension of time, as the issue had not been previously ventilated. The court dismissed the application with costs.