SZNUW v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZNUW, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason. 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 erred in failing to properly assess the applicant's claims of past persecution and the risk of future persecution should they be returned to their country of origin. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the delegate had adequately considered all relevant evidence and applied the correct legal principles in determining the credibility of the applicant's account and the objective reasonableness of their fear.

Judge Street found that the delegate had failed to adequately consider certain aspects of the applicant's evidence, particularly concerning the alleged persecution by non-state actors. The Court reiterated the principles established in cases such as *Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh* and *Applicant S20/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs*, emphasizing the need for a thorough and balanced assessment of all available information, including country information and the applicant's personal circumstances. The delegate's assessment was found to be flawed due to an insufficient engagement with the specific details of the applicant's claims and the potential for harm.

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