AZAES v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, AZAES, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration, which affirmed a decision to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned the lawfulness of the Minister's decision, particularly in relation to the assessment of whether AZAES would be a person to whom Australia would have protection obligations under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the Federal Court was whether the Minister, in affirming the refusal of the protection visa, had failed to properly consider and apply the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act* and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth), specifically concerning the assessment of risk of persecution. The court was required to determine if the Minister's delegate had made an error of law in their assessment of the evidence and the application of the protection criteria.

Judge Simpson found that the delegate's assessment contained a significant error of law. The delegate had failed to adequately consider the applicant's subjective claims and had applied an incorrect standard in assessing the risk of harm. The court reiterated the principle that a delegate must engage with the applicant's evidence in a meaningful way and assess the real chance of harm, not merely a possibility. The delegate's failure to properly consider the subjective fear of the applicant and to apply the correct legal test for assessing risk constituted a jurisdictional error.

Consequently, Judge Simpson quashed the decision of the Minister and remitted the matter to the Minister for redetermination according to law.