Addinall (Migration)

The applicant, Addinall, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the refusal of his Subclass 186 Employer Nomination Scheme visa application, specifically under the Temporary Residence Transition stream. The AAT's decision was based on the applicant's failure to appear at a scheduled hearing before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was whether the AAT had erred in law by affirming the delegate's decision to refuse the visa without holding a hearing, despite the applicant's non-appearance. This involved considering the Tribunal's obligations under the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth) and the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) regarding the conduct of hearings and the circumstances under which a decision can be made in the absence of a party.

Her Honour Judge Findson found that the AAT had not erred in law. The Tribunal had provided the applicant with adequate notice of the hearing date and time, and the applicant had failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for his non-attendance. The Tribunal was therefore entitled, under its statutory powers, to proceed with the review and affirm the delegate's decision based on the available material, which did not support the grant of the visa. The principles of procedural fairness, as applied in migration matters, were considered to have been met by the Tribunal's actions.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.