Austin & Anor v Royal

The applicants, Austin and another, sought leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute concerned the interpretation and application of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and related regulations, specifically in relation to the cancellation of a visa held by the respondent, Mr. Royal. The core of the controversy lay in whether the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection had validly exercised the power to cancel Mr. Royal's visa under s 501(3) of the *Migration Act*.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Full Federal Court had erred in law by finding that the Minister's decision to cancel Mr. Royal's visa was vitiated by a failure to afford him procedural fairness. Specifically, the question was whether Mr. Royal was entitled to be informed of, and given an opportunity to respond to, the adverse information that formed the basis of the Minister's belief that he did not pass the character test, prior to the cancellation decision being made.

Gleeson CJ, sitting in chambers, considered the principles of procedural fairness in administrative decision-making. His Honour noted that while the *Migration Act* confers broad powers on the Minister, these powers must be exercised in accordance with the requirements of natural justice. The critical issue was whether the specific circumstances of the case, including the nature of the information considered by the Minister and the potential impact of the cancellation decision on Mr. Royal, necessitated the provision of a further opportunity to be heard. His Honour concluded that the Full Federal Court had correctly identified a breach of procedural fairness, as Mr. Royal had not been adequately informed of the adverse material and given a reasonable opportunity to address it before his visa was cancelled.

Leave to appeal was refused.