ARX18 v Minister for Home Affairs

In ARX18 v Minister for Home Affairs, the applicant, a Malaysian citizen, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Federal Circuit Court which dismissed her application for reinstatement of her challenge to the refusal of a Protection (class XA) visa. The primary issue before the court was whether the application for leave to appeal demonstrated sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration on appeal. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia on an Electronic Travel Authority visa, had applied for a Protection visa on the basis of family and economic hardship, particularly due to her husband's medical issues and the family's limited income. The delegate and the Tribunal had both found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a Protection visa under the Act.

The Federal Circuit Court had previously dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review due to her non-appearance at a scheduled hearing. Subsequently, the applicant applied for reinstatement, which was also dismissed by the court. The court evaluated the merits of the reinstatement application by assessing whether the grounds for judicial review were arguable. The primary judge concluded that neither of the grounds presented in the application for reinstatement—dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's decision and dissatisfaction with the translation provided by the interpreter—were arguable. The judge found that the first ground merely expressed disagreement with the Tribunal's decision without identifying any jurisdictional error, and the second ground lacked particulars and evidence to support a claim of inadequate translation.

Given the findings, the court held that there was insufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration of the matter on appeal. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was refused, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.