CYT16 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, CYT16, 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 reason specified in section 5(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in their assessment of the applicant's claims, specifically concerning the credibility of the applicant's account and the objective country information relevant to the claimed fear of persecution. The Court was required to determine if the delegate's findings were reasonably open on the evidence before them and if the delegate had properly applied the relevant legal tests for establishing a well-founded fear.

Judge McNab found that the delegate had made several errors in assessing the applicant's credibility, including failing to adequately consider certain aspects of the applicant's evidence and drawing adverse inferences that were not reasonably open. The Court reiterated the principles that a delegate must consider all relevant evidence, assess credibility holistically, and that a well-founded fear requires both a subjective fear and an objective possibility of harm. The delegate's failure to properly engage with the applicant's evidence and the objective country information led to an unreasonable conclusion.

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