AOB18 v Minister for Home Affairs (No.2) and FVZ18 v Minister for Home Affairs and FWB18 v Minister for Home Affairs

In *AOB18 v Minister for Home Affairs (No.2)* and two related matters, *FVZ18 v Minister for Home Affairs* and *FWB18 v Minister for Home Affairs*, the applicants sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister to revoke an earlier decision to lift a bar under section 46A(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicants had failed to lodge a protection visa application before the relevant deadline. The proceedings were heard by Judge Baird in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the Minister was obliged to afford the applicants procedural fairness before exercising the power to revoke the lifting of the section 46A bar, and if so, whether the legislative scheme of section 46A(2C) of the Act provided the necessary intendment to displace this implied presumption of procedural fairness. The applicants also sought an extension of time to file their applications for judicial review, arguing that the practical need to challenge the revocation decision only arose upon the Department's declaration of invalidity of their second Safe Haven Enterprise Visas (SHEV) applications.

Judge Baird granted the extension of time sought by the applicants. The Court found that the revocation decision was a migration decision and a privative clause decision, and that the Court had jurisdiction to review it. While the applicants argued that the Minister had failed to provide procedural fairness and that the legislative scheme did not displace this obligation, the Court ultimately determined that no jurisdictional error had been established in relation to the revocation decision itself. The Court's reasoning focused on the applicants' delay in seeking review and the circumstances surrounding the practical emergence of their need to challenge the revocation decision.