CTO15 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, CTO15, 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 Minister's assessment of whether the applicant would be a person to whom Australia would have protection obligations under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter came before Judge Manousaridis in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision, as affirmed by the Minister, had failed to properly consider the applicant's claims of persecution, specifically in relation to the risk of refoulement. The Court was required to determine if the delegate's assessment of the applicant's credibility and the objective country information had been adequately and reasonably undertaken in accordance with the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act* and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

Judge Manousaridis found that the delegate's assessment had been flawed. The Court reasoned that the delegate had failed to adequately grapple with the applicant's specific claims regarding past persecution and the well-foundedness of his fear of future persecution. The delegate's reliance on generalised country information, without sufficiently engaging with the applicant's individual circumstances and the specific allegations made, led to an unreasonable conclusion. The Court applied the principles of administrative law, including the requirement for a decision-maker to undertake a proper, genuine, and logical assessment of the evidence presented. The Court concluded that the delegate's decision was vitiated by jurisdictional error.

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