Ecc19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision made by the Immigration Assessment Authority. The dispute concerned whether the Authority had engaged in jurisdictional error by failing to consider certain evidence provided by the applicant. The matter was heard by Judge Humphreys in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Immigration Assessment Authority acted unreasonably in its assessment of the evidence presented by the applicant, specifically in its refusal to consider a letter from the applicant's wife, a psychologist's report concerning his wife, an updated psychologist's report concerning the applicant, and passport biodata of his family members. The applicant contended that the Authority's failure to have regard to this material constituted jurisdictional error.

Judge Humphreys found that the Authority's reasoning for excluding the evidence was legally unreasonable. The Court determined that the Authority's evaluative assessment of the relevance of the information and the circumstances in which it was proffered was flawed, particularly in relation to the requirement to find exceptional circumstances to justify considering new information. The Court concluded that the Authority had fallen into jurisdictional error.

Consequently, the Court upheld the application, quashed the decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority, and issued a writ of mandamus directing the Authority to determine the applicant’s application according to law. The respondent was also ordered to pay the applicant's costs.