Austral Pacific Group Limited v Airservices Australia

Austral Pacific Group Limited (APG) sought judicial review of a decision by Airservices Australia (AA) to refuse APG a licence to operate a new air traffic control service. APG alleged that AA's decision was affected by error of law, specifically that AA had failed to consider relevant considerations and had taken into account irrelevant considerations, contrary to the *Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977* (Cth) (ADJR Act). The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether AA, in refusing the licence, had failed to consider a relevant consideration, namely the potential for competition in the provision of air traffic control services, and whether it had taken into account irrelevant considerations, such as the potential impact on AA's existing revenue and its statutory obligations to provide services efficiently and economically. The central question was whether AA's decision-making process had been vitiated by a failure to comply with the requirements of the ADJR Act.

The Court held that AA had not erred in law. Gleeson CJ and Callinan J found that AA's statutory obligations to provide air traffic control services efficiently and economically were relevant considerations that it was entitled to take into account. Furthermore, the Court determined that the potential for competition was not a consideration that AA was bound to take into account in its decision-making process, as the relevant legislation did not mandate such a consideration. The Court concluded that AA had acted within its statutory powers and had not failed to consider relevant matters or taken irrelevant matters into account.