SZVCB v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZVCB, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia by boat, claimed to fear persecution in their country of origin due to their membership of a particular social group. The Minister's delegate had refused the protection visa application, a decision that was subsequently affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The applicant then brought proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the AAT had erred in law in its assessment of the applicant's claims regarding membership of a particular social group and the likelihood of persecution. Specifically, the Court was required to consider whether the AAT had properly applied the principles established in relevant case law concerning the definition of a "particular social group" for the purposes of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the Refugee Convention. This involved examining whether the AAT had correctly identified the characteristics that defined the alleged social group and whether it had adequately considered the evidence presented by the applicant in relation to those characteristics and the risk of harm.

Judge Manousaridis found that the AAT had made an error of law in its characterisation of the applicant's claimed social group. The AAT had failed to properly consider the evidence that the group was defined by a shared immutable characteristic, which is a key element in determining membership of a particular social group. Consequently, the AAT's conclusion that the applicant did not belong to a particular social group was vitiated by this error. The Court therefore set aside the AAT's decision.

The Court remitted the application for a protection visa to the AAT for redetermination according to law.