BGT15 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, BGT15, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason. The matter came before Judge Manousaridis in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant's subjective fear of persecution was objectively reasonable, given the country information available at the time of the decision. This required the Court to assess the credibility of the applicant's claims and to determine whether the Minister had adequately considered all relevant information in reaching the decision.

The Court applied the principles established in *Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh* and *Applicant A v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs*, which require a holistic assessment of the applicant's claims against objective country information. Judge Manousaridis found that the delegate had failed to properly assess the applicant's evidence in light of the available country information, particularly concerning the risk of harm from non-state actors. The Court concluded that the delegate's decision was affected by 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.