BFW20 by his Litigation Representative BFW20A v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

The case of BFW20 by his Litigation Representative BFW20A v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The applicant, BFW20, sought a writ of mandamus compelling the Minister to determine his application for a protection visa. The central issue was whether the Minister could defer consideration of the applicant's visa application on the basis of a possible future exercise of power under section 501(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). Additionally, the court had to decide if the decision in BAL19 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 2189 was plainly wrong and whether the delay in determining the application, due to the Minister awaiting the outcome of appeals to BAL19, constituted a reasonable period.

The court concluded that the respondents were not legally permitted to rely on a possible future exercise of power under section 501 of the Migration Act in defence of the applicant's visa application. It also held that the decision in BAL19 v Minister for Home Affairs was not plainly wrong and should not be disregarded. However, given these findings, the court ruled that a writ of mandamus should be issued to the Minister, compelling him to determine the applicant's visa application according to law, on the basis that section 501(1) does not empower the refusal of the application. The court reserved the liberty for the applicant to apply to vary the order to set a specific period within which the Minister must make a decision and adjourned the matter to a date to be set by the applicant. The court also reserved the right to order costs.