DMH20 v Minister for Home Affairs

In the case of DMH20 v Minister for Home Affairs, the applicant, a Maltese national who has lived in Australia for most of his life, sought a declaration from the Court that it was not reasonably practicable to remove him from Australia in the reasonably foreseeable future. The applicant's visa had been cancelled on character grounds, and he had been in immigration detention since February 2012. The primary legal issue before the Court was whether, based on the evidence provided, the Court should draw the inferences sought by the applicant regarding Malta's unwillingness to accept his return and the consequent impracticality of his removal.

The Court considered the evidence presented by both parties and concluded that the applicant's inferences were not supported by the facts. The evidence showed that Malta's reluctance to accept the applicant's return was due to his refusal to cooperate, including his refusal to sign an application for a travel document. The Court held that as long as the applicant continued to frustrate removal efforts, it could not be concluded that all options for his removal had been exhausted. Furthermore, the Court found that the applicant's conduct significantly impacted the prospects of his removal, and it would be inappropriate to make a declaration devoid of its factual context.

Based on these findings, the Court rejected the applicant's request for a declaration. The Court directed the parties to confer and submit agreed or competing short minutes of order to give effect to these reasons within 14 days.