SZTRL v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZTRL, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned the applicant's claims for protection based on a fear of persecution in their country of origin. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had reasonably considered and assessed the applicant's claims for protection, particularly in light of the evidence presented and the relevant criteria under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). This involved determining if the delegate's adverse credibility findings were justified and if the assessment of the real chance of persecution was conducted in accordance with the law.

Judge Manousaridis found that the delegate had failed to adequately assess the applicant's claims, particularly concerning the subjective fear of persecution. The Court determined that the delegate's adverse credibility findings were not open on the evidence and that the delegate had applied an incorrect test when assessing the real chance of persecution. The Court reiterated the principles that a subjective fear, even if not objectively likely, can be a basis for protection if it is genuinely held and there is a real chance of it being realised. The delegate's failure to properly consider the applicant's subjective experience and the evidence supporting it led to the decision being vitiated by jurisdictional error.

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