FMA17 v Minister for Home Affairs

The applicant, FMA17, sought judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) concerning their application for a protection visa. The applicant claimed to have been assisted by a Sri Lankan politician and feared harm due to a personal connection and imputed political opinion. The core of the dispute involved the applicant's attempts to have the IAA consider new information and a new claim, which the IAA had declined to do, including refusing to grant an interview or consider further country information.

The court was required to determine whether the IAA's refusal to consider the applicant's new information and new claim, and its denial of an interview, constituted a denial of natural justice. Further, the court had to consider whether the IAA's decision was legally unreasonable, particularly in relation to the classification of the applicant's proffered information and claim as "new information" and whether exceptional circumstances had been shown to warrant the IAA's consideration of such material.

Judge A Kelly found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the information or claim presented constituted "new information" in the sense required by the relevant legislation, nor had exceptional circumstances been established. The court reasoned that the IAA was not obliged to consider information or claims that did not meet the statutory threshold for "new information" or where exceptional circumstances were absent. Consequently, the refusal to grant an interview or consider further country information was not found to be a denial of natural justice or legally unreasonable. The application for judicial review was dismissed.