DVO16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor

The applicant, DVO16, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the Immigration Assessment Authority. The core of the dispute concerned alleged deficiencies in translation services during the applicant's interview process, which the applicant contended amounted to jurisdictional error and a denial of procedural fairness. The applicant argued that these translation errors were so fundamental that they rendered the subsequent review process, and thus the decision, invalid.

The legal issues before the High Court revolved around whether the alleged translation errors constituted jurisdictional error. Specifically, the court was asked to consider whether a failure in translation, which may not have been "manifestly apparent" to the decision-maker or reviewer due to linguistic limitations, could still ground a claim of jurisdictional error. The applicant argued that such an error, particularly concerning a fundamental aspect of their claim such as persecution on the grounds of ethnicity, deprived them of a meaningful opportunity to present their case and rendered the material before the reviewing authority inadequate.

The applicant's submissions emphasised that the gravity of the translation error was such that it prevented the reviewing authority from remedying any deficiencies, as the very material upon which a decision should be made was compromised. This, it was argued, meant that the review process was not a review of that which it ought to have been, akin to a situation where no decision was made at all. The respondent, conversely, contended that the applicant had been afforded ample opportunity to state their case, and that any interpretation errors were not of a nature to vitiate the review process, particularly as the applicant had failed to establish their claim on other occasions. The High Court ultimately granted special leave to appeal.