SZULN v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZULN, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a reason specified in section 5(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter came before Judge Manousaridis in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Refugee Convention criteria, as incorporated into Australian domestic law, had been met. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the applicant's fear of persecution, should they be returned to their country of origin, was well-founded and if that fear was based on one of the five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.

Judge Manousaridis considered the evidence presented by the applicant regarding their past experiences and the general country information pertaining to their home country. The Court applied the principles established in *Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs* and *Applicant A v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs*, which require an assessment of whether there is a real chance of persecution. The Court found that the applicant had not discharged the onus of proving a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, as the evidence did not establish a sufficient nexus between the feared harm and any of the protected grounds.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.