Keong v Minister for Immigration

In *Keong v Minister for Immigration*, the applicant, Mr Keong, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant him a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether Mr Keong had established a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of his political opinion, as required by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

The primary legal issue before Dowdy J was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in law in assessing Mr Keong's claim for a protection visa. Specifically, the court was required to determine if the delegate had failed to properly consider all relevant evidence, including evidence of past persecution and the objective country information relating to Sri Lanka, and whether the delegate's adverse credibility findings were reasonably open on the evidence.

Dowdy J found that the delegate had failed to adequately consider the cumulative effect of the evidence presented by Mr Keong, particularly in relation to the alleged threats and harassment he faced. The court reiterated the principle that an assessment of a protection visa claim must involve a holistic and cumulative consideration of all relevant factors, and that adverse credibility findings must be based on demonstrable inconsistencies or lack of plausibility in the applicant's account. The delegate's failure to engage with significant portions of the evidence and to provide adequate reasons for rejecting key aspects of Mr Keong's testimony led to the conclusion that the decision was affected by an error of law.

The court ordered that the Minister's decision be set aside and remitted to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.