JARK and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and Anor

In *JARK and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and Anor*, the applicants, JARK and others, sought judicial review of decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the second respondent. The core of the dispute concerned the lawfulness of the Minister's decision to refuse to revoke a deportation order made against the applicants, who were non-citizens. The matter came before Hayne J of the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister's decision to refuse revocation of the deportation orders was vitiated by a failure to consider relevant considerations or by the consideration of irrelevant ones. Specifically, the applicants contended that the Minister, in exercising the power under s 501(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) to refuse to revoke a deportation order, failed to take into account certain crucial factors that were relevant to their personal circumstances and the public interest.

Hayne J reasoned that the power to refuse revocation of a deportation order under s 501(1) of the *Migration Act* required the Minister to consider all relevant considerations. His Honour found that the Minister's delegate had failed to adequately consider the submissions made by the applicants regarding their rehabilitation, their ties to Australia, and the potential consequences of their deportation. This failure amounted to an error of law, as the delegate had not properly exercised the discretion vested in them. Consequently, the decisions to refuse revocation were found to be unlawful.