Majid v Minister for Home Affairs

In the Federal Court of Australia, Justice Dowdy considered an application for judicial review brought by Mr. Majid and other applicants against the Minister for Home Affairs. The applicants sought to challenge a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Delegate of the Minister's refusal to grant Subclass 457 visas. Additionally, the applicants sought a declaration that their original applications for these visas were invalid under section 46 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The core of their claim was that their former migration agent had engaged in fraud against both them and the Department, thereby vitiating the decision-making process.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the AAT had erred in finding it lacked jurisdiction to review the visa refusal, and whether the original visa applications were valid under section 46 of the *Migration Act*. These issues hinged on the alleged fraudulent conduct of the migration agent and the applicants' knowledge and involvement in that conduct.

Justice Dowdy found that while the former migration agent was indeed a dishonest fraudster who acted fraudulently, the first applicant was complicit in this fraud. The Court determined that this complicity meant no jurisdictional error had been established in relation to the AAT's decision. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.