AQN15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor

In AQN15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor, the applicant sought judicial review in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia of a decision made by the Refugee Review Tribunal. The sole ground of review advanced by the applicant was that the Tribunal's decision was affected by legal error. The applicant indicated that this ground had been drafted by a Justice of the Peace and failed to provide any particulars of the alleged legal error, despite opportunities to amend the application and file submissions.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant had properly particularised a ground of review, and more broadly, whether any jurisdictional error had been demonstrated in the Tribunal's decision. The Court was required to determine if the applicant's submissions constituted a valid basis for judicial review or if they amounted to an impermissible attempt to have the merits of the Tribunal's decision reconsidered.

Judge Howard reasoned that the failure to particularise the ground of review was, in itself, a sufficient basis for dismissing the application, referencing precedent from WZATH v Minister for Immigration & Anor. Furthermore, the Court found that the applicant's submissions throughout the hearing were consistently directed towards urging the Court to undertake a merits review of the Tribunal's factual findings and credibility assessments, rather than identifying any jurisdictional error. The Court reiterated the principle, as stated in Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang, that judicial review is concerned with the legality of administrative action and not with the reconsideration of its merits.

Consequently, the application was dismissed on the basis that the ground of review was not properly particularised and, in any event, the applicant had failed to identify any jurisdictional error, instead seeking an impermissible merits review of the Tribunal's decision.