FTZ18 v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, FTZ18, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the Minister for Immigration's refusal to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm in China, but the AAT did not accept his account. The grounds of review were presented in a narrative form, and the applicant ultimately declined to make submissions in support of his application for judicial review.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the AAT had committed a jurisdictional error in its review of the protection visa refusal. This required the court to consider whether the applicant's grounds of review, as presented and without further submission, were sufficient to establish a jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal.

Judge Driver found that no jurisdictional error had occurred. The court reasoned that the applicant had been afforded a proper opportunity to present his case and make submissions, but had chosen not to do so. The grounds of review, as articulated, did not disclose any error of law on the part of the AAT. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.