The Court dismissed the judicial review application, finding no jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings, which were based on substantive inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence rather than demeanour, and that the Tribunal's refusal to adjourn for a face-to-face hearing was not legally unreasonable where credibility concerns were 'strong, bordering on overwhelming' and not so nuanced or marginal as to require in-person assessment. The Court also rejected claims of circular reasoning in the Tribunal's treatment of the applicant's Australian religious practice as opportunistic, holding the finding was independently supported by prior credibility findings, and found no error in the Tribunal's alternative conclusion that the applicant could attend a registered church in China, as this was based on a factual finding that she had no fundamental objection to doing so rather than requiring suppression of beliefs.
The full text is available to signed-in members.