EGZ17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

In *EGZ17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs*, Driver J of the Federal Court of Australia considered an application for judicial review concerning a decision made by the Minister. The applicant, EGZ17, sought to challenge the lawfulness of the Minister's decision to refuse to grant a protection visa.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister's delegate had failed to consider relevant considerations and had taken into account irrelevant considerations when assessing EGZ17's claim for a protection visa. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if the delegate's assessment of the applicant's credibility and the assessment of the risk of harm in the applicant's country of origin were vitiated by errors of law.

Driver J found that the delegate had indeed failed to properly consider crucial aspects of EGZ17's evidence regarding past persecution and the objective country information relevant to the assessment of future risk. The Court applied the principles established in administrative law concerning the duty to afford procedural fairness and the requirement for decision-makers to undertake a comprehensive and balanced assessment of all relevant evidence. The delegate's failure to adequately engage with significant portions of the applicant's testimony and to properly weigh the available country information led to the conclusion that the decision was affected by jurisdictional error.

Consequently, Driver J made orders setting aside the decision of the Minister's delegate and remitting the application for a protection visa to the Minister for redetermination according to law.