SZUBU v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor; SZTGV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor

These appeals concerned the lawfulness of decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant protection visas to two applicants, SZUBU and SZTGV. The applicants, who were citizens of Iran, had arrived in Australia by boat and sought protection visas under s 417 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Minister's decisions were affirmed by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) and subsequently by the Federal Court of Australia. The applicants then appealed to the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Minister, in considering the applications for protection visas, was bound by the findings of fact made by the Refugee Review Tribunal in relation to the applicants' claims for protection. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether the Minister's delegate was entitled to depart from the RRT's findings of fact when making a decision under s 417 of the *Migration Act*.

Gageler and Keane JJ held that the Minister's delegate was not bound by the findings of fact made by the Refugee Review Tribunal. Their Honours reasoned that the statutory scheme established by the *Migration Act* for the grant of protection visas under s 417 contemplates a fresh consideration of the applicant's claims by the Minister, rather than a review of the RRT's decision. The delegate was therefore entitled to reach their own independent findings of fact, even if those findings differed from those of the RRT. The appeals were accordingly dismissed.