SZSQS & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor

The applicants, SZSQS and others, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) concerning their claims for protection visas based on religious persecution in China. The primary applicant's evidence was disbelieved in significant aspects by the RRT.

The court was required to determine two principal legal issues: first, whether the RRT's decision was vitiated by apprehended bias, and second, whether the RRT overlooked an element of the third applicant's claims.

Justice Driver found no jurisdictional error in the RRT's decision. Regarding apprehended bias, the court held that the RRT's findings, even if critical of the principal applicant's evidence, did not demonstrate a lack of impartiality or a predisposition to find against the applicants. The RRT's assessment of credibility was within its mandate. Furthermore, the court concluded that the RRT had adequately considered the third applicant's claims, finding no evidence that any element of those claims was overlooked. The court also made observations regarding the need for restraint when making allegations of bias against the RRT.