Khosa v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, Mr. Khosa, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse his application for a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether the Minister's decision was affected by an error of law, specifically concerning the proper application of the non-refoulement obligations under international law, as incorporated into Australian domestic law. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister, in assessing Mr. Khosa's claim for a protection visa, had failed to properly consider and apply the principles of non-refoulement, particularly in light of the risk of persecution or harm that Mr. Khosa alleged he would face if returned to his country of origin. This involved determining whether the Minister's assessment of the evidence regarding the country conditions and the individual risk to Mr. Khosa was legally sound.

Judge Street found that the Minister's decision-making process had indeed been vitiated by an error of law. The Court reasoned that the Minister had failed to adequately assess the evidence presented by the applicant regarding the specific risks he faced, and had instead applied an overly broad or generalised assessment of the country conditions. This failure meant that the Minister had not properly discharged the non-refoulement obligations, which require a careful and individualised assessment of the risk of harm. The Court applied the principles of administrative law, including the duty to afford procedural fairness and the requirement for decision-makers to properly consider all relevant evidence.

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