Brar and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for joinder under section 30(1A) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) by Ms Seibel, who was a victim of the criminal actions of Mr Brar, the visa holder whose Partner visa had been cancelled. Mr Brar was seeking review of the decision not to reinstate his visa, a decision which the Tribunal was required to consider in light of Direction No. 99. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal, constituted by N A Manetta SM, was required to determine whether Ms Seibel should be joined as a party to the proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Seibel's application for joinder should be granted. Ms Seibel sought to be made a party to ensure she could observe the entirety of the proceedings, arguing that her psychological wellbeing was an interest that might be affected by the Tribunal's decision, particularly given the Tribunal's obligation under Direction No. 99 to consider the impact of its decision on victims. The Tribunal also considered whether Ms Seibel could otherwise provide a statement of evidence as part of the respondent's case.

The Tribunal reasoned that while it was obliged to consider the impact of its decision on victims under Direction No. 99, this obligation did not necessitate Ms Seibel being joined as a party. The Tribunal noted that Ms Seibel could provide a statement of evidence to inform the Tribunal's consideration of the impact on victims, and that her ability to observe the proceedings was not a sufficient ground for joinder in the exercise of the Tribunal's discretion. The Tribunal concluded that it had sufficient means to consider the relevant matters without Ms Seibel being a party to the proceeding.

The Tribunal ordered that Ms Seibel's application to be made a party to the proceeding be refused.