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

SZSTM (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (the Minister) to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who claimed to be a citizen of Iran, alleged persecution based on his membership of the Hazara ethnic minority and his conversion to Christianity. The application 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 law by failing to adequately consider and assess the applicant's claims regarding his ethnicity and religious conversion when determining his eligibility for a protection visa. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if the delegate's assessment of the evidence relating to these claims was so unreasonable that no reasonable decision-maker could have reached the same conclusion.

Judge Raphael found that the delegate's assessment of the applicant's claims was flawed. The Court held that the delegate had not adequately grappled with the evidence presented by the applicant concerning the persecution faced by Hazaras in Afghanistan and Iran, nor had the delegate properly considered the implications of the applicant's conversion to Christianity in the context of Iranian law and society. The Court concluded that the delegate's reasoning was insufficient and failed to provide a proper basis for the refusal of the protection visa, thereby constituting an error of law.

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