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

In the Federal Court of Australia, Humphreys J considered an application by Mr Chand against the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The dispute concerned the applicant's claims, which had been considered by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Court included whether the Tribunal had made a jurisdictional error in its assessment of the evidence. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the Tribunal had failed to adequately consider a 2015 report (the Selvadurai report) and whether it had properly addressed concerns regarding signature verification of statutory declarations made by the applicant's family.

Humphreys J reasoned that the Tribunal had indeed considered the 2015 Selvadurai report, referencing it at paragraph 39 of its decision. While the Tribunal noted discrepancies between this report and a 2014 assessment regarding the sponsor's cognitive function and the sponsor's apparent improvement, it ultimately did not find the 2015 report persuasive on the critical issue of the sponsor's capacity to understand sponsorship obligations. The Court also noted that the applicant had been put on notice regarding signature verification issues as early as May 2016, and in such circumstances, the Tribunal was not obliged to proactively seek this verification again, drawing on principles established in *ANC16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection*. The Court affirmed that the Tribunal is not required to accept all claims uncritically and must respond to the case advanced by the applicant, without an obligation to investigate claims independently.

As the Court was not satisfied that ground one, concerning the consideration of the Selvadurai report, had been made out, it found it unnecessary to consider grounds two to four, which relied on a positive finding for ground one. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.