Haj-Ismail, Haydar v The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs

Haj-Ismail, Haydar v The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs involved applicants who sought an order of review in the Federal Court of Australia to challenge decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs regarding their deportation and refusal of resident status. The applicants, Haj-Ismail and another, argued that the Minister's decisions were flawed and that they were entitled to certain procedural rights under the law. The central issue before the court was whether the Minister had acted lawfully in refusing the applicants' applications for resident status under the Migration Act and the Regularisation of Status Program (ROSP) of 1980. The applicants contended that they were not prohibited immigrants for the required five-year period, that the Minister had failed to consider relevant factors, and that they had a legitimate expectation of being granted resident status.

The court considered whether the Minister's discretion in granting resident status was subject to any legal constraints and whether the principles of natural justice applied. It examined whether the applicants had a legitimate expectation of being granted resident status and if the Minister had erred in law by not providing them with an opportunity to make representations. The court found that the Minister's decisions were indeed flawed, and the applicants were entitled to procedural fairness. The court held that the Minister had failed to consider the applicants' eligibility under the ROSP and had not provided them with an adequate opportunity to make representations. Consequently, the court set aside the Minister's decisions and directed that the applicants be given a chance to present their case regarding their character, the continuation of Haj-Ismail's studies, and other relevant matters before any further decision was made.

The court ordered that the deportation orders against the applicants be set aside and that the Minister pay the applicants' costs of the proceedings. Additionally, the court granted the applicants the right to apply for further orders if needed and permitted the return of certain documents to the Commonwealth Crown Solicitor, subject to an appeal.