EKV18 v Minister for Home Affairs

EKV18 (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Home Affairs (the respondent) to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia without a visa, claimed to fear persecution in their country of origin. The Minister's delegate had refused the protection visa application, a decision later affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant then sought to challenge this refusal in the Federal Court.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the applicant argued that the delegate failed to properly consider relevant considerations and took into account irrelevant considerations when assessing the applicant's claims of persecution. This failure, the applicant contended, vitiated the decision-making process and rendered it legally invalid.

Judge Baird found that the delegate had indeed made a jurisdictional error. The delegate's assessment of the applicant's credibility was found to be flawed, particularly in relation to the weight given to certain aspects of the applicant's evidence and the interpretation of country information. The court applied the principles of administrative law, emphasizing that a decision-maker must genuinely consider all relevant material and must not be influenced by irrelevant material. The delegate's failure to properly engage with the applicant's evidence and the available country information meant that the delegate did not exercise their power according to law.

Consequently, the court made orders quashing the delegate's decision and remitting the application for a protection visa to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.