FST18 v Minister for Home Affairs

The applicant, FST18, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned the assessment of FST18's claims for protection, specifically whether they met the criteria for a protection visa under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in law in assessing FST18's claims for protection, particularly in relation to the assessment of past persecution and the risk of future persecution should FST18 be returned to their country of origin. This involved a consideration of the evidence presented by FST18 and the application of the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act* and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth), as well as international obligations concerning refugees.

Judge Egan found that the delegate had failed to adequately consider certain aspects of FST18's evidence regarding past persecution, and that this failure led to an error in the assessment of the risk of future persecution. The Court applied the principles of administrative law, including the requirement for a decision-maker to undertake a proper consideration of all relevant evidence and to provide adequate reasons for their decision. The Court determined that the delegate's assessment was not open to them on the evidence before them.

The Court set aside the decision of the Minister and remitted the application for a protection visa to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.