MEVADA v Minister for Immigration

Mevada was a person who sought to remain in Australia on a subclass 457 visa. After the Minister for Immigration made a decision to cancel Mevada’s visa, Mevada lodged an application for review of that decision with the Migration Review Tribunal. The Tribunal found that Mevada’s application was invalid because it was not accompanied by evidence. Mevada sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision. The central issue before the court was whether the requirement for an application for review to be “accompanied by evidence” meant that the application had to be accompanied by evidence at the time it was lodged, or whether it could be accompanied by evidence at a later date, before the decision was made. The court found that the correct interpretation of the relevant legislation was that an application could be accompanied by evidence at any time before the decision was made. The court found that the Tribunal had erred in its interpretation of the relevant legislation, and so the decision of the Tribunal was quashed. The court ordered that the Tribunal hear and determine the application according to law.