EQM18 v Minister for Home Affairs

EQM18 (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs (the respondent) to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who was of Iranian nationality, claimed to have a well-founded fear of persecution in Iran due to their membership of the Baha'i faith. The Minister's delegate had refused the protection visa application, finding that the applicant's claims were not credible and that there was no real chance of persecution. The applicant subsequently applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for judicial review of this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the applicant argued that the delegate failed to properly consider and assess the evidence presented in support of their claims, including evidence relating to the general country information concerning the treatment of Baha'is in Iran and the applicant's personal circumstances. The applicant contended that this failure amounted to an error in the exercise of the delegate's statutory power to determine the protection visa application.

Judge Baird found that the delegate had failed to adequately engage with the applicant's evidence regarding the specific risks faced by Baha'is in Iran, particularly in relation to the applicant's stated reasons for fearing persecution. The Court held that a proper assessment required more than a superficial consideration of the evidence; it necessitated a genuine and reasoned evaluation of its weight and credibility in light of the relevant legal criteria for protection visas. The delegate's reasons were found to be deficient in this regard, leading to the conclusion that the decision was affected by jurisdictional error.

The Court ordered that the decision of the delegate be set aside and remitted to the Minister for redetermination according to law.