Khanji v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

Street J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia heard an application for a constitutional writ concerning a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The applicant, a citizen of India, sought review of the Tribunal's decision, which affirmed the delegate's refusal to grant him an Employer Nomination (Subclass 186) Visa. The refusal was based on the applicant not being the subject of an approved nomination, a requirement under clause 186.233(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant had demonstrated an arguable case for relief, specifically concerning alleged errors by the Tribunal. The applicant raised four grounds of appeal, including claims that the Tribunal predetermined the outcome before hearing his evidence, that his nominated position was on the list when he applied, that the Tribunal undervalued his provided documents, and that he required further documentation to formulate arguments.

Street J considered each ground, finding no arguable case of relevant error. Regarding the assertion that the Tribunal predetermined the outcome, the Court noted that the lack of an approved nomination was a critical issue, raised by both the delegate and the Tribunal itself. The Court found no material to suggest the Tribunal did not approach the review with an open mind, and that adverse findings did not indicate a lack of impartiality. The Court also determined that the applicant's disagreement with the finding of no approved nomination did not establish that an approved nomination existed, and that the other grounds did not engage with the Tribunal's decision or disclose arguable error. Consequently, the Court was not satisfied that the application had raised an arguable case for the relief sought.

The Court exercised its powers under rule 44.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) and dismissed the application.