The applicant challenged the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal by way of judicial review on the bases, inter alia, that the Tribunal had considered the country of origin information selectively, that the decision was wrongly based on an acceptance that the applicant should practice his religion exclusively in private, and that this was a denial of his fundamental right to freedom of religious expression.
The Court granted leave to seek judicial review as it appeared to the Court that the Tribunal had failed to consider material evidence regarding the applicant having come to the attention of the Iranian authorities, that the Tribunal’s finding that the applicant could not be categorised as proselytising had been made without consideration of the country of origin information, and that the Tribunal had substituted its own view of the applicant’s religious activities for what should have been a consideration of the probable view of those activities likely to be taken by the Iranian authorities in light of the evidence.
