H & Anor, Ex parte Re RRT

This matter concerned an application for leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia, brought by H and another party (the applicants), in relation to a decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. The underlying dispute involved an application for judicial review of a decision made by the respondent, RRT, which had affirmed a decision of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicants a visa.

The primary legal issue before Gleeson CJ, sitting in chambers, was whether the applicants had demonstrated an arguable case of error on the part of the Full Court of the Federal Court, thereby justifying the grant of special leave to appeal to the High Court. This required consideration of whether the Full Court had erred in its interpretation or application of the relevant migration legislation and administrative law principles in its review of the RRT's decision.

Gleeson CJ noted that the applicants' grounds of appeal focused on alleged errors in the Full Court's assessment of the evidence and its understanding of the statutory obligations imposed on the RRT. However, after reviewing the material, Gleeson CJ concluded that the applicants had not established an arguable case of error by the Full Court. His Honour found that the Full Court had properly considered the relevant legal principles and the evidence before it, and that its decision was not demonstrably wrong.

Consequently, Gleeson CJ refused leave to appeal to the High Court.