SZVRO v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZVRO, 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 assessment of the applicant's claims for protection, specifically whether the applicant would face a real chance of suffering harm amounting to persecution if returned to their country of origin. The matter came before Judge Driver of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa was affected by an error of law. This involved determining whether the delegate had properly considered all relevant aspects of the applicant's claims, including the subjective fear of persecution and the objective likelihood of harm, in accordance with the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and relevant case law. Specifically, the Court had to assess if the delegate had applied the correct legal test when evaluating the risk of harm and whether the delegate's findings were supported by the evidence.

Judge Driver found that the delegate had made an error of law by failing to adequately consider the cumulative effect of the various harms alleged by the applicant. The delegate had assessed each alleged harm in isolation, rather than considering how they might combine to create a situation of persecution. The Court reiterated the principle that a delegate must assess the overall risk of harm, taking into account all relevant factors, and that a failure to do so constitutes an error of law. The Court therefore set aside the delegate's decision.