Davis v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Ors; DCM20 v Secretary of Department of Home Affairs & Anor

The High Court of Australia considered two applications for judicial review concerning decisions made under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). In the first matter, *Davis*, the applicant challenged a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation. In the second matter, *DCM20*, the applicant challenged a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. Both applicants sought to challenge the lawfulness of these decisions.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the delegates of the Minister and the Secretary, in making the respective decisions, had failed to take into account a relevant consideration, namely the best interests of the children who were family members of the applicants. This question required the Court to consider the scope of the obligation to consider the best interests of children under s 4(2) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth) and its application in the context of visa cancellation and protection visa decisions.

The Court held that the delegates had failed to take into account a relevant consideration. It reasoned that s 4(2) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth) imposed a mandatory obligation on the Minister, and by extension, their delegates, to consider the best interests of children in circumstances where the Minister had the power to make a decision that would affect a child. This obligation extended to decisions concerning visa cancellation. Similarly, in the context of protection visa applications, the Court found that the best interests of children were a relevant consideration that ought to have been taken into account by the delegate. The Court emphasised that the failure to consider this mandatory consideration rendered the decisions unlawful.

Consequently, the High Court made orders quashing the decisions of the Minister and the Secretary in both matters. The matters were remitted to the respective decision-makers to be determined according to law.