Ahmed v Minister for Immigration

The applicants in Ahmed v Minister for Immigration brought an action in the Federal Court of Australia against the Minister for Immigration and the Secretary to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. The applicants, who had been born in Egypt, sought judicial review of the Minister's refusal to grant them a class BQ Skilled – Australian sponsored (Migrant) visa. The applicants argued that the decision was flawed on a number of bases, including that it was unreasonable, discriminatory, and based on irrelevant considerations. They also argued that the Minister had failed to take into account relevant considerations, including their English language skills and professional qualifications.

The court was required to determine whether the Minister's decision to refuse the applicants a visa was lawful and whether there were any errors of law or unreasonableness in the decision-making process. The court considered whether the decision was based on irrelevant considerations, failed to take into account relevant considerations, and whether it was discriminatory. The court also considered whether the decision was unreasonable in the sense that no reasonable decision-maker could have made the decision on the evidence before them.

The court found that the decision was flawed on a number of bases and was therefore unlawful. The court found that the decision was based on irrelevant considerations and failed to take into account relevant considerations. The court also found that the decision was discriminatory, as the Minister had applied different criteria to the applicants than would have been applied to Australian citizens or permanent residents. The court found that the decision was unreasonable, as no reasonable decision-maker could have made the decision on the evidence before them.

The court ordered that the application be upheld on several grounds and issued writs of certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition against the Minister and the Secretary. The court ordered that the Minister quash the decision made in relation to the applicants and determine their application for review according to law. The court also ordered that the Minister be prevented from acting on the delegate's decision to refuse the applicants a visa.