EII17 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, EII17, 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 lawfulness of the Minister's decision, specifically whether it was affected by jurisdictional error. The matter came before Judge Street of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister, in affirming the refusal of the protection visa, had failed to consider relevant considerations or had taken into account irrelevant considerations, thereby constituting a jurisdictional error. This involved an examination of the delegate's assessment of the applicant's claims for protection and whether that assessment was conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and associated regulations.

Judge Street found that the delegate had failed to adequately consider the applicant's claims regarding past persecution and the real chance of future persecution. The Court reasoned that the delegate's decision contained a failure to engage with crucial aspects of the evidence presented by the applicant, particularly concerning the specific circumstances of the alleged persecution and the applicant's subjective fear. This failure to properly consider relevant material amounted to a jurisdictional error. Consequently, the Minister's decision affirming the refusal of the protection visa was set aside.