SZQDZ v Minister for Immigration and Anor (No.2)

This matter concerned an application for judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, following a recommendation by an independent merits reviewer that the applicant not be recognised as a person to whom Australia has protection obligations. The proceeding had been remitted to the Federal Court by a previous decision of this Court, following a successful appeal on a discrete issue.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the merits reviewer had erred in law in their assessment of the applicant's claims for protection. Specifically, the Court was required to determine whether the reviewer had failed to properly consider the evidence before them, or had applied an incorrect legal standard in assessing the risk of persecution.

In reaching its decision, the Court analysed the evidence presented by the applicant and the reviewer's findings. The Court applied the principles of administrative law, including the requirement for administrative decision-makers to undertake a comprehensive and objective assessment of all relevant evidence. The Court found that the merits reviewer had failed to properly consider certain key pieces of evidence, which were central to the applicant's claim of persecution. This failure constituted an error of law, as it meant the reviewer's decision was not based on a proper understanding of the facts.

Consequently, the Court set aside the decision of the merits reviewer and remitted the matter back to the Department for reconsideration according to law.