Forrest & Forrest Pty Ltd v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs

In the case of Forrest & Forrest Pty Ltd v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the appellant sought judicial review of the Minister's decision under the Aboriginal heritage legislation to decline to consent to the use of land. The appellant's application for review was heard and dismissed by the State Administrative Tribunal, which affirmed the Minister's decision. The appellant appealed to the court, contending that the Tribunal erred in law by regarding the Minister's decision as probative of its correctness. The court was required to determine whether the Tribunal's approach to the Minister's decision was legally sound and whether the matter should be remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

The court examined the principles established in Collins v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, where the Full Court of the Federal Court held that the decision of a primary decision-maker, in this case the Minister, did not have any further probative significance in determining whether the decision was correct or preferable. The court found that the Tribunal had erred in treating the Minister's decision as having independent probative value. Instead, the Tribunal should have formed its own view on the merits of the case, giving appropriate weight to the reasons provided by the Minister where they were persuasive or based on established facts.

The court concluded that the Tribunal had indeed erred in law by giving undue weight to the Minister's decision. It held that the matter should be remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration, with the direction that the Tribunal should form its own view on the merits of the case, taking into account the reasons provided by the Minister where appropriate, but not treating the Minister's decision as probative of its correctness.

The court ordered that the matter be remitted to the State Administrative Tribunal for reconsideration in accordance with the court's reasons. The Tribunal was directed to form its own view on the merits of the case, considering the reasons provided by the Minister where they were persuasive or based on established facts, but not treating the Minister's decision as probative of its correctness.