The Court dismissed the judicial review application, finding the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had properly considered the applicant's claim of feared harm from a loan company in China. The Tribunal's adverse credibility findings — based on inconsistencies in evidence regarding the timing of business operations, the amount owed, and the identity of suppliers — were open to it on the material and did not constitute jurisdictional error. The Court confirmed that where a Tribunal sets out, engages with, and makes findings on a claimed basis for protection, a failure-to-consider-a-claim ground will not be made out merely because the claim was rejected on credibility grounds.
The full text is available to signed-in members.