Meyrick v Minister for Home Affairs

The applicant, Meyrick, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) affirming a decision of the Minister's delegate not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa under section 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958. The primary legal issues were whether the AAT erred in finding that the best interests of Meyrick's infant child did not weigh either for or against the revocation of his visa, and whether the AAT adequately considered material provided by the applicant. Additionally, there were questions about the consistency of the Minister's Direction 65 with the Family Law Act 1975 and international law, and whether Direction 65 should be read down to be consistent with these laws.

The court found that the AAT did not err in its consideration of the best interests of the child. The AAT's finding that this consideration did not weigh either for or against revocation was not inconsistent with the Family Law Act or international law. The court determined that Direction 65 was not inconsistent with the Family Law Act, international law, or common law principles, and that the AAT's finding was not based on a misunderstanding or misapplication of Direction 65. Furthermore, the court held that the AAT adequately engaged in an active intellectual process and considered all relevant matters, including the impact on victims, which Meyrick had failed to demonstrate was inadequately considered. The court also found that the AAT's conclusion that the impact on victims consideration weighed neither in favour nor against revocation was not legally unreasonable.

In light of the above, the court dismissed the application and ordered that Meyrick pay the first respondent's costs of the application, fixed at $18,500. The entry of orders was governed by Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.