# data[].attributes.headline
Khawar plus her three children applied for a protection visa under s 36 Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Protection visa was refused. This was because Australia did not owe this person protection. As a victim of domestic violence at the hands of her husband and his family she was unable to receive any help. In the Federal Court of Australiathe Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs refused the protection visa. This was then take to federal court.The error of law was made by the tribunal. This was due to the fact that they did not identify which social group she belonged to. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Khawar plus her three children applied for a protection visa under s 36 Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Protection visa was refused. This was because Australia did not owe this person protection. As a victim of domestic violence at the hands of her husband and his family she was unable to receive any help. In the Federal Court of Australiathe Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs refused the protection visa. This was then take to federal court.The error of law was made by the tribunal. This was due to the fact that they did not identify which social group she belonged to. 

# data[].attributes.body
Regardless of these fact the application was refused.

# data[].attributes.body
Ms Khawar applied for protection visas for herself and her 3 children under s36 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) on the grounds she was a victim of domestic and family violence in Pakistan perpetrated by her husband and his family and that she had requested protection from Police in Pakistan on 4 occasions and they were unwilling/unable to protect her. The application was denied by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and this decision was later supported by the Refugee Review Tribunal. An appeal was lodge to the Federal Court on the basis that the decision involved an error of law concerning convention application, specifically around persecution where the State has failed to protect an individual, and qualification what constitutes a particular social group''. Court found an error of law was made interpreting legislation, it was open for the Tribunal to find the women/married women in Pakistan fall into a 'particular social group' and refusal/failure of the State authorities to provide protection to the women of Pakistan in a 'particular social group' constitutes persecution under the convention.

# data[].attributes.body
Ms Khawar applied for a protection Visa for herself and her 3 children. It was denied by Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. Ms Khawal went to the Refugee Review Tribunal where it was again denied. Ms Khawal appealed the decision at the Federal Court and it was determined that the Tribunal has made in error of law with protection obligations of the Refugee Convention and Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The matter was referred back to the Refugee Review Tribunal. The protection Visa's were still denied.

# data[].attributes.body
Great post Kelly! You include the names of the parties, the material facts of the case, the court that heard the case, the procedural history of the case, the legal issues and the outcome of the case - in your own words too. Well done!

# data[].attributes.body
In the case of Khawar v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 168 ALR 190.  A Pakistani woman and her 3 children sought a protection order under s 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) but was refused. Under the Refugee Convention criteria it was decided that Australia was not obligated to grant protection to Khawar. The claim was that she was a victim of domestic violence at the hands of her husband in Pakistan and that no assistance from police was given on 4 separate occasions. The refusal of the initial application was affirmed when appealed to the Refugee Review Tribunal then a judicial review was sought by the applicant in the Federal Court of Australia. On determination that the RRT had made an error of law in the requirement that Khawar be a member of a particular social group or that fear of persecution in the failure of police protection in Pakistan could fall under the Refugee Convention law. The review determined that additional consideration was required in accordance with Australian law and was referred back to the RRT.

# data[].attributes.body
Mrs Khawar applied for a protection visa on behalf of herself and her 3 children under s36 Migration Act 1958(Cth). After being denied by the delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and again at the Refugee Review Tribunal, she took the case to the Federal Court, arguing that the Tribunal made an error when applying the law to the material facts of her case. The Tribunal found that the Australian Government did not owe her protection under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. In both instances, they agreed that Mrs Khawar was a victim of domestic violence but this was not due to her being a member a any particular social group, as is the requirement of the Convention. The Federal Court held that Mrs Khawar did fit the criteria of the convention as the Pakistan Police would not protect her due to her being a 'married woman in Pakistan'. Her husband also believed this to be true. The Court ordered that the tribunal's decision be set aside and the matter be referred back to the Refugee Review Tribunal to be re-heard according to the case law set out in this case.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Pakistani mother appealed to the Federal Court under the Migration Act 1958(Cth) that she and her three children should be allowed to stay in Australia under s36 Migration act 1958(Cth). The mother argued she belonged to a group  defined as a married women in Pakistan who were subject to violence  from he husband and a lack of protection of the State to protect her. The matter was resolved when the court found that the State failed to protect the Plaintiff from physical abuse

# data[].attributes.subject
A Pakistani mother appealed to the Federal Court under the Migration Act 1958(Cth) that she and her three children should be allowed to stay in Australia under s36 Migration act 1958(Cth). The mother argued she belonged to a group  defined as a married women in Pakistan who were subject to violence  from he husband and a lack of protection of the State to protect her. The matter was resolved when the court found that the State failed to protect the Plaintiff from physical abuse

# data[].attributes.body
The Application was a Pakistani mother and her three children appealing to stay in Australia under s36 Migration Act 1958(Cth).

Australia has protection obligations to Ms Khawar under the Convention if she is a person who (Art 1A(2) of the Convention):
Ms Khawar belonged to a social group a married women in Pakistan. Ms Khawar was a women of domestic violence at the hand of her husband.

The Application was denied by the delegate Minster of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and another time by the Refugee Review Tribunal refusing the protection visa.

# data[].attributes.body
The decision made by the Tribunal involved an error of law, which came up to a Judicial review jurisdiction granted to the Federal Court under  Migration Act 1958 (Cth) The specific grounds involved in the interpretation of Article 1A (2) of the Refugee Convention, stating directly that, a group defined by gender such as married women in Pakistan, can indeed qualify as a particular social group as understood by the convention.

# data[].attributes.body
The dispute in this case was  whether Mrs Khawar and her three children  were eligible to receive protection visas in Australia, under s 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). With the claim that she would be subjected to domestic violence if protection wasn't approved.  At conclusion of the case, Mrs Khawar's Protection visa's were refused.  During this case 's outcome it was also noted that the tribunals had made an error in the interpretation of the law applicable; this is in regards to the protection obligations of the Refugee Convention and Migration Act 1958 (Cth).It was also noted that the tribunal had made a mistake when  identifying her 'particular social group'. Nevertheless Mrs Khawar and her children application was refused by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT).

# data[].attributes.body
Pakistani woman, Mrs Khawar applied for her and her three children to receive protection visas in Australia through the s 36 Migration Act 1958 (Cth), after allegations of domestic violence from her husband and his family and failure of law enforcement officers to provide protection which led to her fear of persecution within Pakistan. Her protection visa was refused, as she was not an individual who was entitled to protection obligations under the Refugee Convention, as the Tribunal’s consideration of the husband’s motivation for harming her involved an incorrect interpretation of the applicable law (i.e. well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of membership of a particular social group). Although, after multiple appeal proceedings which regarded the similar factual background and involve married Pakistani women, it was evident that the tribunal had made an error of law involving an incorrect interpretation of the applicable law, in regards to the protection obligations of the Refugee Convention and Migration Act 1958 (Cth).