SZUNJ v Minister for Immigration

This matter concerned an appeal to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia concerning the nationality of the applicant under Lebanese law. The applicant sought to establish Lebanese nationality, and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs opposed this. The court was required to determine the correct interpretation and application of Lebanese nationality law based on expert evidence.

The central legal issue before the court was how to resolve conflicting expert evidence regarding Lebanese nationality law, specifically concerning Article 1 of the Lebanese Nationality Act. The court had to determine which expert's interpretation of the Act, particularly regarding the circumstances under which a person is considered a Lebanese national by reason of birth in Lebanon, was to be preferred. This involved considering the admissibility and weight of expert evidence on foreign law under the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth).

The court applied sections 174 and 175 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) regarding the adducing of evidence of foreign law. Both parties had qualified experts in Lebanese law, who provided opinions on identical questions. The court noted that both experts were registered practising lawyers in Lebanon, thus qualifying them to give expert evidence. The court then proceeded to examine the evidence of each expert in relation to each question, resolving differences of opinion. In relation to Article 1 of the Lebanese Nationality Act, both experts agreed that a person whose father was a Lebanese national is also a Lebanese national. However, the Minister's expert, Mr Fakhry, provided a more detailed answer regarding birth in Lebanon, stating that a person is considered a Lebanese national by reason of birth in Lebanon irrespective of their father's nationality in specific circumstances, such as where it is not proven the person acquired a foreign nationality upon birth by affiliation, or if born of unknown parents.