Boutros v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

This matter concerned an application by Ms Boutros against the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The dispute centred on a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which Ms Boutros sought to have set aside. The case was heard by Driver J in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had committed jurisdictional error by failing to determine a critical aspect of Ms Boutros' case. Specifically, the Court was required to consider whether the Tribunal erred in not determining whether gestational diabetes, which affected Ms Boutros' daughter during her second pregnancy, constituted a "serious medical condition" for the purposes of assessing exceptional circumstances under PAM3. This issue had been raised with the Tribunal both orally and in writing.

Driver J reasoned that the Tribunal had indeed fallen into error by failing to resolve the question of whether the gestational diabetes was a "serious medical condition" relevant to exceptional circumstances. The Court noted that the Tribunal had acknowledged the issue but had not made a determination on it. Furthermore, the Court found that the Tribunal was wrong to conclude there had been no real change in the situation since the visa was initially granted in 2017, particularly given the onset of the gestational diabetes during the second pregnancy.

Ms Boutros was successful in her application, with the Court finding that the Tribunal's decision was affected by jurisdictional error. Consequently, Ms Boutros was granted the relief she sought, and the Court indicated it would hear the parties on the issue of costs.