Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Rajenthiram v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1119 SUJANTHAN RAJENTHIRAM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 395 OF 1999 EINFELD, WHITLAM and KATZ JJ SYDNEY
10 AUGUST 1999
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 395 OF 1999
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SUJANTHAN RAJENTHIRAM
Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGES: EINFELD, WHITLAM and KATZ JJ
DATE: 10 AUGUST 1999
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
EINFELD J:
1 The appellant, who is 21 years of age, is a Sri Lankan of Tamil ethnicity and Hindu faith who arrived in Australia on 21 July 1998 without a visa. On 9 November 1998 the Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed a delegate's refusal to grant him refugee asylum. On 14 April 1999 Justice Branson dismissed an application to review that decision and the appellant now appeals her Honour's judgment. The Tribunal's decision was based upon its conclusion that the facts relied upon by the appellant were not a plausible account of the circumstances which led up to his departure from Sri Lanka.
2 The Court has frequently expressed concern about decisions made purely on the grounds of credibility by a non-expert Tribunal where there are not the usual safeguards for the ascertainment of truth long established in the adversarial system of justice operating in this country. Having in mind the possible consequences of error, such decisions can create difficulty and doubt about the legality of adverse decisions received by applicants for refugee status.
3 However, this case gives rise to very little doubt. The Tribunal has clearly identified the difficulties in accepting the account of the appellant and Justice Branson was able to find no legal fault in the way in which the Tribunal approached its task. It is apparent that her Honour carefully considered the way in which the Tribunal approached the matter and how it dealt with the various factual allegations made.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate