The Federal Court held that the Tribunal did not commit jurisdictional error by failing to expressly address each element of the appellant's case on internal relocation under s 36(2B)(a), where the appellant's evidence as to why she would be located by her persecutors was only a high-level assertion without any articulated mechanism. The Court overturned the primary judge's finding that the Tribunal failed to actively and intellectually engage with the relocation claim, holding that where an applicant's contentions are vague and unparticularised, the Tribunal is not required to provide a line-by-line refutation and its express rejection of the claim, combined with its summary of the evidence, was sufficient. The Court also refused leave to amend the notice of appeal on the basis that the proposed new grounds lacked merit given the success of the notice of contention.
The full text is available to signed-in members.