CHZ19 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor

The applicant, CHZ19, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant a visa. The dispute concerned the lawfulness of the Minister's decision, which was made under s 501(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The matter was heard by Kiefel CJ and Edelman J of the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Minister's delegate, in considering the applicant's character, had failed to take into account a relevant consideration, namely the applicant's rehabilitation and efforts to address the underlying causes of their offending behaviour. The applicant argued that the delegate's assessment of risk was vitiated by this failure, rendering the decision to refuse the visa unlawful.

Their Honours found that the delegate's reasons for decision did not demonstrate that the applicant's rehabilitation and efforts at addressing the causes of their offending were properly considered. While the delegate acknowledged the applicant's submissions regarding these matters, the reasoning focused predominantly on the seriousness of the past offending and the risk of future offending, without adequately engaging with the evidence of change. The Court reiterated the principle that when a decision-maker is required to consider a particular matter, they must genuinely and properly take it into account, not merely acknowledge its existence. The failure to do so meant the delegate had failed to take into account a relevant consideration.

The High Court made orders quashing the decision of the Minister's delegate to refuse the visa. The matter was remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for redetermination according to law.