Chen v Minister for Immigration

In *Chen v Minister for Immigration*, the applicant, Mr Chen, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse his application for a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether Mr Chen had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a reason specified in the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter came before Judge Street in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in law in assessing Mr Chen's claim for a protection visa. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the delegate had failed to properly consider all relevant evidence, including evidence of past persecution and the objective likelihood of future persecution, in accordance with the principles established in *Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs* and related authorities. The Court also considered whether the delegate had applied the correct legal test for establishing a "well-founded fear".

Judge Street found that the delegate had failed to adequately assess the cumulative impact of the evidence presented by Mr Chen. The delegate's assessment had, in the Court's view, treated certain pieces of evidence in isolation rather than considering them as a whole, which was crucial for determining the credibility and substance of Mr Chen's fear. The Court reiterated the principle that a fear does not need to be the *most likely* outcome, but rather a *real chance* of persecution, and that the delegate's reasoning did not sufficiently demonstrate an understanding or application of this threshold.

Consequently, Judge Street set aside the decision of the Minister and remitted the application for a protection visa to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.