EWT17 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, EWT17, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who arrived in Australia by boat, claimed to fear persecution in their country of origin due to their membership of a particular social group. The Minister's delegate had refused the protection visa application, a decision that was subsequently affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant then brought proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia seeking to challenge the Tribunal's decision.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Tribunal had erred in law in its assessment of the applicant's claims regarding their membership of a particular social group and the real risks of persecution they faced. Specifically, the Court was required to consider whether the Tribunal had properly applied the principles established in relevant High Court authorities concerning the definition of a "particular social group" for the purposes of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the assessment of the objective likelihood of harm.

Judge Lucev found that the Tribunal had made a jurisdictional error by failing to adequately consider the evidence presented by the applicant regarding the formation and characteristics of the alleged particular social group. The Court held that the Tribunal had applied an overly narrow interpretation of the concept, thereby failing to engage with the applicant's case in a legally sound manner. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision was set aside.

The Court ordered that the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal be set aside and remitted to the Tribunal for redetermination according to law.