Application of Vito Zepinic (No 3)

Vito Zepinic applied for a review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal to grant him a bridging visa. The Tribunal had found that his removal would be contrary to Australia's international obligations under the Convention against Torture. The primary judge, Justice Gilmour, dismissed the application. Zepinic appealed to the Full Court, which allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the Tribunal. The Minister subsequently applied for special leave to appeal the Full Court's decision to the High Court. The High Court dismissed the application.
The central issue for the court was whether the Minister's application for special leave to appeal should be granted. The Minister contended that the Full Court's decision required the court to resolve an issue of principle of general importance to the administration of justice or the law of the Commonwealth, namely whether the Tribunal could take into account international human rights obligations when considering a bridging visa application. The Full Court held that the issue was not of principle, and the High Court agreed.

The High Court held that the Full Court's reasons demonstrated that the appeal was not taken on an issue of principle but rather on the basis of the Full Court's disagreement with the primary judge's determination of the facts and the weight to be given to the evidence. The High Court found that the Full Court's reasons did not engage with the question of principle contended by the Minister. Instead, the Full Court focused on the exercise of its discretion under the Migration Act and the application of the correct legal test to the facts of the case. The High Court concluded that the Full Court's decision did not require the resolution of an issue of principle and dismissed the application for special leave to appeal. The Full Court's decision stands as the final determination of the matter.