Miller v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs & Anor

The High Court of Australia considered the case of *Miller v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs & Anor*. The dispute concerned the lawfulness of the Minister's decision to refuse to grant the applicant a visa. The applicant, Mr. Miller, was a New Zealand citizen who had been convicted of certain offences in Australia. The Minister's decision was made under section 501(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), which allows for the refusal or cancellation of a visa if the person passes the "character test".

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Minister, in exercising the power under s 501(1) of the *Migration Act*, was required to consider the best interests of a child in accordance with Article 3(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The applicant argued that this obligation arose from the Minister's duty to act according to law, which included giving effect to Australia's international obligations under the Convention. The Minister contended that the *Migration Act* was a self-contained code and that the Convention did not impose a freestanding obligation on the Minister in the exercise of his statutory powers.

The High Court, by majority, held that the Minister was not required to consider the best interests of a child when making a decision under s 501(1) of the *Migration Act*. The Court reasoned that the *Migration Act* was a comprehensive and exhaustive statement of the law governing the Minister's powers in relation to visa applications and character assessments. It was not open to the Minister to import obligations from international conventions that were not expressly incorporated into domestic law by the Act itself. The Convention, while reflecting important values, did not create legally enforceable rights or obligations on the Minister in the exercise of his statutory discretion under s 501(1) in the absence of specific legislative incorporation.

The High Court dismissed the application for judicial review.