BYE17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 441

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BYE17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 441 Appeal from: BYE17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2018] FCCA 1625

File number: VID 850 of 2018

Judge: BESANKO J

Date of judgment: 2 April 2019

Catchwords: MIGRATION — where a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection refused to grant the appellant a Temporary Protection (subclass 785) visa under s 91WA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) because the appellant provided bogus documents as evidence of his identity, nationality or citizenship without a reasonable explanation for doing so — where the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision — where the Federal Circuit Court dismissed the appellant's application for judicial review of the Tribunal's decision MIGRATION — where the Tribunal was given two certificates under s 438(1)(a) of the Act and a notification under s 438(1)(b) — consideration of the validity of the certificates and the notification — where the Tribunal noted the information covered by the certificates related to an age determination process conducted by the Department —where the Tribunal noted the information covered by the notification related to a forensic document examination conducted by the Department MIGRATION — whether the Tribunal contravened s 424A(1) of the Act by failing to provide clear particulars of the information covered by the certificates to the applicant for comment or response — whether the appellant provided a copy of the delegate's decision record to the Tribunal for the purpose of his application for review within the meaning of s 424A(3)(b) of the Act — where the certificates covered information that was also referred to in the delegate's decision record — whether the Tribunal had regard to matters covered by the certificates over and above what was contained in the delegate's decision record — consideration of Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA [2019] HCA 3 — whether the Tribunal unreasonably failed to exercise its discretion to disclose matters covered by the certificates ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by acting on an invalid certificate — whether the Tribunal had regard to matters covered by the invalid certificate — whether a court is justified in inferring that the Tribunal paid no regard to matters covered by a certificate in reaching its decision in the absence of evidence of active consideration in the Tribunal's reasons or elsewhere — whether the Tribunal's acting on the invalid certificate was a material breach in that compliance could realistically have resulted in a different decision