In FTZK v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection [2014] HCA 26 (27 June 2014) Article
1F(b) of the Refugees Convention excluded from the grant of refugee status a person of whom there were "serious reasons for considering" had committed serious non-political crimes. In reviewing a decision to refuse a visa the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) referred to various factors that combined to satisfy it that there were serious reasons for considering the applicant had committed a crime in China.
An appeal to the Full Federal Court was dismissed but the appeal to the High Court allowed: French CJ with Gageler J; Hayne J; Crennan with Bell JJ. The members generally concluded that most of the factors referred to were actions in Australia and had been referred to by the AAT as showing "consciousness of guilt" but were not logically probative of what had happened in China.
1F(b) of the Refugees Convention excluded from the grant of refugee status a person of whom there were "serious reasons for considering" had committed serious non-political crimes. In reviewing a decision to refuse a visa the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) referred to various factors that combined to satisfy it that there were serious reasons for considering the applicant had committed a crime in China.
An appeal to the Full Federal Court was dismissed but the appeal to the High Court allowed: French CJ with Gageler J; Hayne J; Crennan with Bell JJ. The members generally concluded that most of the factors referred to were actions in Australia and had been referred to by the AAT as showing "consciousness of guilt" but were not logically probative of what had happened in China.
