FLS18 v Immigration Assessment Authority

The Federal Circuit Court considered a review application concerning a Safe Haven Enterprise Visa. The applicant, FLS18, challenged the Immigration Assessment Authority's (IAA) decision to affirm the Minister's refusal to grant a protection visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether an arrival interview, and its recording and transcript, were properly before the delegate at the time of the initial decision, and whether the IAA had accurately represented the content of that transcript in its own reasons.

The court was required to determine whether the IAA had failed to properly discharge its statutory task. Specifically, the court had to consider the applicant's contentions that the IAA's reasons inaccurately recorded what was contained within the transcript of the applicant's arrival interview. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether the Minister had adduced sufficient evidence to demonstrate what was actually before the delegate when the initial decision was made, or if general evidence from a Departmental officer was adequate.

In reaching its decision, the court applied the principle established in *Blatch v Archer*, drawing inferences against the IAA and the Minister due to the lack of specific evidence from the delegate regarding what information was before them. The court found that the IAA had not properly discharged its statutory duty, particularly in relation to its assessment of the arrival interview evidence. Consequently, the court allowed the review application, quashed the IAA's decision by writ of certiorari, and remitted the matter to the IAA for redetermination according to law by writ of mandamus. The Minister was ordered to pay the applicant's costs.