CQX18 v Minister for Home Affairs

CQX18 (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs (the respondent) to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia without a visa, claimed to fear persecution in their country of origin due to their membership of a particular social group. The Minister's delegate had refused the protection visa application, a decision that was affirmed on internal review. The applicant then sought review of this latter decision in the Federal Court.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the applicant contended that the delegate failed to properly consider and assess the evidence relating to their claims of persecution, thereby failing to exercise their non-compellable duty to assess the application according to the relevant legislative criteria. This involved determining whether the delegate had adequately considered the applicant's fear of persecution based on their membership of a particular social group, as defined by international and domestic law.

Judge Street found that the delegate had failed to properly engage with the applicant's evidence concerning their membership of a particular social group and the associated risk of persecution. The delegate's reasons for decision did not demonstrate a sufficient understanding or assessment of the specific characteristics that defined the applicant's social group and why those characteristics would expose them to a real chance of persecution. Consequently, the delegate had not undertaken the necessary assessment required by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

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