EHA18 v Minister for Home Affairs

The applicant, EHA18, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned the Minister's assessment of whether EHA18 would be a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter came before Judge Egan of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister's decision was affected by an error of law, specifically concerning the application of the "real chance" test in assessing the risk of harm to EHA18 if returned to their country of origin. The Court was required to determine if the delegate, in making the decision on behalf of the Minister, had properly considered all relevant evidence and applied the correct legal standard when assessing the likelihood of persecution.

Judge Egan found that the delegate had made an error of law by failing to adequately consider certain aspects of EHA18's claims and by applying an incorrect standard in assessing the risk of harm. The Court reiterated the principle that the "real chance" test requires a consideration of probabilities, not mere possibilities, and that all relevant evidence must be weighed appropriately. The delegate's assessment was found to be flawed in its evaluation of the credibility of certain evidence and in its overall assessment of the risk of persecution.

The Court quashed the original decision and remitted the application for a protection visa to the Minister for redetermination according to law.