Win in Federal Court: AAT found to have committed jurisdictional error

In the area of judicial review of migration decisions, the way that a Departmental migration officer or a tribunal member interprets and assesses supporting documentary evidence will often be critical to how they view an applicant’s claims for protection. Administrative law requires migration officers and tribunal members to give real, genuine and proper consideration to documentary evidence an applicant provides to them in support of their protection-visa claims. Hunter Shafiz Lawyers was recently involved in acting for a client who had appealed to the Federal Court from a decision of the Federal Circuit Court to dismiss an application for judicial review of the AAT’s decision to refuse their protection-visa application. The central issue in the Federal Court proceedings was whether the AAT had given proper consideration to a newspaper article which the client had provided in support of his claims. This was a document we identified in over 500 documents provided to our firm. The headline and sub-heading of the article referred to a bomb being placed next to a house, but no reference was made to this in the body of the article. The AAT found that the newspaper article did not support the client’s protection-visa claims, even though these claims involved reference to a bomb being placed outside of our client’s family member’s house. The case was refused by the Federal Circuit Court before Justice Street. We appealed the matter to the Federal Court which ultimately held that the AAT did not give proper consideration to the article as evidence in support of the client’s claims. On this basis, the AAT was found to have committed jurisdictional error and the client’s appeal was allowed and the matter was remitted to the AAT for reconsideration. If you are looking for legal assistance with judicial review of an adverse migration decision, please contact our office on (02) 9682 5433 or via email at info@huntershafiz.com.au.