The Federal Court held that the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by failing to explain why it rejected apparently corroborative identity evidence (including an independent fingerprint report, family statements, birth certificates, a family record book, and a missing person certificate) after making adverse credibility findings. While a tribunal may reject corroborative evidence following an adverse credibility finding, it must assess and engage with that evidence, particularly where it comes from an independent source, rather than simply stating it has been 'carefully considered'. The Court rejected arguments that the Tribunal's separate inferential reasoning about the implausibility of the appellant's claims constituted an independent basis for the decision, finding that reasoning could not be separated from the unresolved identity question.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.