Eshetu, Ex parte- Re Minister for Immig

The applicant, Eshetu, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to refuse to grant him a protection visa. The Minister's decision was made following a recommendation by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the RRT, in making its recommendation to the Minister, had failed to afford the applicant procedural fairness. Specifically, the applicant contended that the RRT had relied on adverse information that had not been disclosed to him, thereby preventing him from responding to it and making submissions in relation thereto.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, held that the RRT had indeed failed to provide procedural fairness. Their Honours reasoned that where an administrative decision-maker proposes to make a decision adverse to a party, and that decision is based on information which is adverse to the party, the decision-maker must disclose that information to the party and afford them an opportunity to comment on it. This principle is fundamental to the concept of procedural fairness and applies to the RRT in its review function. The Court found that the RRT had failed to disclose certain information to the applicant, which was then relied upon in its adverse recommendation, thus breaching the applicant's right to procedural fairness.

The High Court ordered that the decision of the RRT be quashed and remitted to the RRT for redetermination according to law.