Sadat v Minister for Immigration

In *Sadat v Minister for Immigration*, the applicant, Mr Sadat, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant him a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether the Minister's decision was affected by an error of law, specifically concerning the assessment of Mr Sadat's claims for protection. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had failed to properly consider and assess the applicant's claims of past persecution and well-founded fear of future persecution, as required by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and relevant international obligations. This involved determining whether the delegate had applied the correct legal test for assessing credibility and whether the delegate's findings of fact were reasonably open on the evidence presented.

Judge Smith reasoned that the delegate's decision-making process contained a legal error. The delegate had, in effect, applied an incorrect standard of proof when assessing the applicant's claims, requiring a level of certainty that was not mandated by the legislation. The Court reiterated the principles that a protection visa applicant need only establish a real chance of persecution, not a certainty, and that the assessment must be undertaken with an objective, rather than subjective, focus on the likelihood of harm. The delegate's failure to properly engage with the applicant's evidence and to apply the correct legal test constituted an error of law.

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