ARX18 v Minister for Immigration

This matter came before Judge A Kelly of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia concerning an application for reinstatement of a judicial review proceeding. The applicant, ARX18, had failed to attend a show cause hearing, leading to the dismissal of their application pursuant to rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court Rules 2021. The applicant subsequently sought to have the matter relisted, which was treated as an oral application for reinstatement.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether to exercise its discretion to reinstate the proceeding. This required the Court to assess whether the applicant had demonstrated an "arguable" case for relief, a threshold lower than that required for success at a final hearing. The Court also considered the nature of judicial review of decisions made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, specifically that such review is supervisory and not appellate, and that a Tribunal decision is only amenable to review if vitiated by jurisdictional error, particularly in the context of privative clause decisions.

In determining whether to grant reinstatement, the Court applied the principles established in *House v The King*, acknowledging that the decision is essentially discretionary. The Court reiterated that the threshold for an arguable ground of review is that it must not be fanciful, illogical, impermissible, or devoid of merit, but rather possess a level of rationality and a basis in the material sufficient to warrant further argument. The Court noted that when an applicant is self-represented and not a native English speaker, a less stringent expectation applies to the development of grounds of review. Upon re-examining the court book materials and the Tribunal's reasons, the Court found no basis upon which the applicant's grounds for judicial review could be considered arguable.

Consequently, the Court refused the application for reinstatement.