Dimian & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia

The applicants, Mr. Dimian and Ms. Dimian, sought judicial review of a decision by the Commonwealth of Australia to refuse their application for a protection visa. The dispute concerned the lawfulness of the decision-making process by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the delegate of the Minister, in refusing the protection visa application, had failed to afford the applicants procedural fairness. Specifically, the applicants contended that they were not given adequate notice of adverse information that was relied upon by the delegate in reaching the decision, nor were they given a sufficient opportunity to respond to that information.

Gleeson CJ, in delivering the judgment, considered the principles of procedural fairness as established in Australian administrative law. His Honour affirmed that a person facing a decision that may adversely affect their rights or interests is entitled to know the case they have to meet and to have an opportunity to answer it. The Court found that the delegate had relied on adverse information that had not been disclosed to the applicants, thereby breaching the duty to afford procedural fairness. The failure to provide the applicants with an opportunity to comment on the adverse material meant the decision was vitiated by jurisdictional error.

Consequently, the High Court made orders quashing the decision of the delegate to refuse the protection visa application. The matter was remitted to the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to be determined according to law.