ADQ15 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, ADQ15, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a reason specified in the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in finding that ADQ15 did not have a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason. This required the Court to consider the evidence presented by the applicant and assess whether the delegate's adverse credibility findings were reasonably open on the material before them.

Judge Street found that the delegate's adverse credibility findings were not reasonably open on the material. The delegate had failed to adequately consider significant portions of the applicant's evidence, including medical reports and witness statements, which corroborated aspects of the applicant's account. The Court reiterated the principle that adverse credibility findings must be based on demonstrable inconsistencies or implausibilities in the applicant's evidence, and that a failure to engage with substantial corroborating evidence can lead to an error of law.

The Court ordered that the decision of the Minister be set aside and remitted to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.