Federal Court. Do the submissions to the IAA alter its obligation to consider the review material, including the claims that were dealt with by the delegate? In determining whether a claim not expressly made to the IAA nevertheless clearly emerged from the materials before it, is it significant that the delegate considered the claim? Was it necessary for the Appellant to expressly repeat to the IAA the claim made to the delegate, in circumstances where there was no evidence that he had abandoned it?
Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:
Question 1: Do the submissions to the IAA limited to 5 pages alter the IAA's statutory obligation to consider the review material, including the claims that were dealt with by the delegate?
Question 2: In determining whether a claim not expressly made to the IAA nevertheless clearly emerged from the materials before it, is it significant that the delegate considered the unarticulated claim as relevant based on the “established facts”?
Question 3: In BYR17, the FCA held that the IAA was "not obliged to conduct a review in relation to claims that have been abandoned or which are no longer pressed by an applicant for a protection visa". In order for the IAA's obligation to review an unarticulated claim to arise, was it necessary for the Appellant to expressly adopt or embrace that claim in his submissions to the IAA, in the absence of any evidence that he had abandoned that claim?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: