Opposition by Ping shi to application under section 92 of the

The matter before the Federal Court of Australia concerned an opposition by Ping Shi to an application made under section 92 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant, Ping Shi, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant her a visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the Minister's decision was affected by jurisdictional error.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister, in assessing Ping Shi's application, had failed to consider relevant considerations or had taken into account irrelevant considerations, thereby vitiating the decision-making process. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the delegate's assessment of the applicant's claims for protection had been conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act* and associated regulations, and whether the delegate had adequately addressed the evidence presented by the applicant.

In reaching its decision, the Court analysed the delegate's reasons for refusal and compared them against the evidence and submissions provided by Ping Shi. The Court applied the principles of administrative law concerning jurisdictional error, emphasising the obligation of a decision-maker to genuinely consider all relevant material. The Court found that the delegate had failed to properly engage with certain aspects of Ping Shi's evidence, particularly concerning her claims of past persecution and her fear of future persecution. This failure to adequately consider relevant material constituted a jurisdictional error.

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