Kanu v Minister for Immigration

Kanu applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse his visa application. The Minister's delegate had refused Kanu's application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (subclass 820) on the basis that Kanu did not meet the criteria for a genuine and continuing relationship with his sponsor, as required by s 5(1)(c) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and cl 820.211(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate's decision to refuse the visa application was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the Court was asked to consider whether the delegate had failed to take into account relevant considerations or had taken into account irrelevant considerations when assessing the genuineness and continuing nature of Kanu's relationship with his sponsor. Kanu argued that the delegate had placed undue weight on certain aspects of the evidence and had failed to properly consider other evidence that supported the authenticity of the relationship.

Judge Vasta found that the delegate had failed to adequately consider all the evidence presented by Kanu, particularly concerning the couple's shared finances and social interactions. The delegate's assessment had focused heavily on perceived inconsistencies in the documentary evidence without giving sufficient weight to the oral evidence and the overall context of the relationship. The Court reiterated the principle that a delegate must conduct a holistic assessment of the evidence, and that a failure to do so can constitute jurisdictional error. The Court concluded that the delegate's decision was affected by jurisdictional error.

The Court ordered that the decision of the Minister's delegate be set aside and remitted to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.