DAAI & JOENG

In the matter of DAAI & JOENG, Justice Macmillan of the Federal Court of Australia considered an application for an order under s 102 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) to set aside a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The applicants, DAAI and JOENG, sought to challenge the AAT's decision to affirm the refusal of their applications for protection visas. The core of the dispute concerned the AAT's assessment of the applicants' claims for protection, particularly in relation to the risk of persecution they alleged they would face if returned to their country of origin.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the AAT had erred in law in its assessment of the applicants' claims. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the AAT had failed to adequately consider or properly apply the relevant legal principles concerning the assessment of protection claims, including the standard of proof and the assessment of credibility. The applicants contended that the AAT had made findings of fact that were not supported by evidence and had failed to engage with crucial aspects of their evidence.

Justice Macmillan's reasoning focused on the nature of the AAT's review function and the requirements of procedural fairness. The Court reiterated that the AAT must conduct a fresh review of the evidence and not simply rubber-stamp the original decision-maker's findings. His Honour found that the AAT had indeed made errors of law by failing to properly consider all the evidence presented by the applicants and by making findings that were not logically open on the material before it. The Court emphasised that the AAT's decision-making process must be transparent and demonstrate a thorough engagement with the applicant's case.

Consequently, Justice Macmillan made orders setting aside the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and remitting the applications for protection visas to the AAT for redetermination according to law.