CRG17 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, CRG17, sought judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) concerning their application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa. The dispute centred on whether the IAA had constructively failed to exercise its jurisdiction under Part 7AA of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and whether it had adequately considered all material before it, particularly in relation to complementary protection. The matter was heard by Judge Street in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the IAA had made jurisdictional error by failing to consider all relevant material when assessing the applicant's claim for complementary protection, and specifically, whether the IAA had failed to make an express finding as to whether the applicant would be subject to significant harm by reason of extortion demands.

Judge Street found that the IAA had not constructively failed to exercise its jurisdiction. The Court reasoned that the IAA had considered the material before it, including the concerns raised by the applicant regarding extortion demands. The Court concluded that the IAA's decision did not disclose a failure to consider relevant material or a failure to make necessary findings, and therefore, no jurisdictional error had been made out.

Consequently, the amended application for judicial review was dismissed.