SZTFA v Minister for Immigration

This matter came before Judge Barnes of the Federal Court of Australia. The applicant, SZTFA, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration. The core of the dispute concerned the assessment of the applicant's ability to relocate within their country of nationality as a practical alternative to facing persecution.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the decision-maker had adequately considered the "practical realities" of relocation for the applicant, and whether the Tribunal had applied the correct test in determining the reasonableness and practicability of such relocation. Specifically, the Court was required to consider the extent to which the decision-maker must explore impediments to relocation raised by an applicant, and whether the Tribunal had given sufficient attention to the specific circumstances of the applicant in assessing the feasibility of moving to a different region within their home country.

Judge Barnes, in reaching his decision, drew upon established principles from cases such as *Randhawa* and *NAIZ*. His Honour emphasised that a decision-maker must move beyond a general assumption that a safe haven exists and must give specific attention to the issue of relocation. The extent of this task is largely determined by the case presented by the applicant, who may raise impediments to relocation. The Court reiterated that the assessment of whether relocation is "reasonable" in the sense of being "practicable" is highly dependent on the particular circumstances of the applicant and the impact of relocation on them. The Tribunal's approach of expecting an applicant to relocate and live "discreetly" without further persecution was found to have sidestepped a proper consideration of what might reasonably be expected of the applicant in terms of relocation within their home country.