EZZ17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor

The applicant, EZZ17, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant a protection visa. The Minister's delegate had refused the visa application on the grounds that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter came before Judge Antoni Lucev in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central 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 and assess the evidence provided in support of their claim for protection, thereby failing to undertake the assessment required by the *Migration Act*. This failure, it was contended, vitiated the delegate's decision.

Judge Lucev found that the delegate had indeed made a jurisdictional error. The delegate's reasons for decision demonstrated a failure to engage with significant aspects of the applicant's evidence, particularly concerning the applicant's fear of persecution in their country of origin. The Court held that a proper assessment of a protection visa claim requires a thorough and holistic consideration of all relevant evidence, and that the delegate's selective engagement with the material amounted to an error of law. The Court quashed the delegate's decision.