AMB19 v Minister for Immigration and Anor (No.2)

The applicant, AMB19, sought judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) to refuse their application for a protection visa. The applicant claimed a fear of harm in Iran due to their asserted homosexuality. The IAA had disbelieved the applicant's account, finding material inconsistencies within it. The matter came before Judge Driver of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the IAA had misunderstood the applicant's evidence, misconceived the nature of its review, or unreasonably failed to consider obtaining new information. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if the IAA's failure to consider interviewing the applicant constituted a jurisdictional error.

Judge Driver found that the IAA had indeed committed a jurisdictional error by failing to consider interviewing the applicant. The Court reasoned that in circumstances where an applicant's credibility is in doubt due to inconsistencies in their account, and where the applicant's claims relate to sensitive personal matters such as sexual orientation, an interview may be a necessary step to properly assess the evidence and the applicant's claims. The failure to consider this avenue meant the IAA had not undertaken its review in a manner that allowed for a fair and thorough consideration of the applicant's case.

The Court ordered that the decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority be set aside.