CNY17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

In the Federal Court of Australia, the appellant, a Faili Kurd from Iraq, sought judicial review of the decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) to affirm the Minister for Immigration's decision to refuse his application for a protection visa. The central issue in the appeal was whether the IAA's decision was affected by apprehended bias as a result of the Secretary of the Department providing prejudicial information to the IAA. The court had to determine whether the fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the IAA might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the resolution of the application for review, considering all relevant circumstances.

The court held that the appeal must be dismissed. It found that the question of apprehended bias is to be resolved by reference to all relevant circumstances as they exist at the time the question is answered. In this case, the question was being answered after the second IAA decision. The decision and the reasons for it were part of the relevant circumstances required to be considered. The court found that the IAA's statement that it would not consider the prejudicial but irrelevant material that was before it was sufficient to assuage the risk that a reasonable observer might apprehend that the IAA's decision might be affected by subconscious bias in respect of that material.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered that the appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal as agreed or taxed.