CEK15 v Minister for Immigration

CEK15 (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration (the respondent) to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The matter came before Judge Street of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the respondent’s decision to refuse the protection visa was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the Court was required to consider whether the delegate of the Minister, in assessing the applicant's claims, had failed to properly consider relevant evidence or had applied an incorrect legal test in relation to the applicant's fear of persecution.

Judge Street found that the delegate had failed to adequately assess the applicant's claims regarding past persecution and the real chance of future persecution. The Court reasoned that the delegate had not properly engaged with the specific evidence provided by the applicant concerning the nature and extent of the threats faced, and had instead applied a generalised assessment. This failure to properly consider the individual circumstances and evidence constituted a jurisdictional error.

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