MCKEOWN (Migration)

The applicant, McKeown, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning a Parent (Migrant) (Class AX) visa, Subclass 103. The AAT had affirmed the refusal of the applicant's visa application.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the AAT had erred in law by failing to consider certain evidence that was provided to the Department of Home Affairs after the initial visa refusal but before the AAT's decision. Specifically, the applicant argued that the AAT had not adequately addressed the significance of a letter of assurance provided in support of the application.

The court found that the AAT had failed to properly consider the letter of assurance and the other evidence submitted by the applicant. The AAT's decision was based on the information available at the time of the initial refusal, without giving due weight to the subsequent evidence that may have addressed the grounds for that refusal. The court applied the principle that an administrative tribunal must consider all relevant evidence placed before it when making its determination.

Consequently, the court remitted the matter back to the AAT for redetermination according to law.