Applicant VEAL of 2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

The applicant, VEAL, sought judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) which affirmed the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs' refusal to grant a protection visa. The central issue before the High Court of Australia concerned whether the RRT had afforded the applicant procedural fairness when it considered an unsolicited letter containing allegations against the applicant, without informing the applicant of the letter's existence or its contents.

The High Court was required to determine whether procedural fairness mandated that the RRT disclose the unsolicited letter and its allegations to the applicant, even though the RRT stated it gave no weight to the letter in reaching its decision. This involved an examination of the principles of procedural fairness in the context of administrative decision-making, particularly where adverse information comes to light during the review process.

The Court held that procedural fairness required the RRT to inform the applicant of the existence and contents of the unsolicited letter. Even though the RRT claimed to have given no weight to the letter, its mere consideration of the material, which contained adverse allegations, meant that the applicant was denied a proper opportunity to respond to potentially damaging information. The Court reasoned that the applicant's right to a fair hearing included the right to know and address all material that might influence the decision-maker, regardless of whether the decision-maker ultimately gives it weight. The failure to disclose the letter constituted a breach of the rules of natural justice.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal with costs, setting aside the orders of the Full Court of the Federal Court and ordering that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.