Gurung (Migration)

The applicant, Mr Gurung, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse his application for a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), under the Direct Entry stream. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal had affirmed the Minister's decision.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was whether the Tribunal had erred in law by failing to consider, or adequately consider, information provided by a third party that alleged Mr Gurung had not been employed in the nominated position for the required period. This information, often referred to as 'dob in' information, was submitted after the initial application but before the Tribunal's decision.

Her Honour Judge Findson found that the Tribunal had failed to properly engage with the 'dob in' information. The Tribunal's decision stated that it had considered all the evidence before it, but it did not articulate how it dealt with the specific allegations made in the third-party information. This failure amounted to an error of law, as the Tribunal was obliged to consider all relevant evidence placed before it, particularly when that evidence directly challenged the applicant's eligibility for the visa. The court held that the Tribunal's approach to this crucial piece of evidence was insufficient.

Consequently, the court set aside the Tribunal's decision and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for redetermination according to law.