Minister for Home Affairs v Lee

The appellant, the Minister for Home Affairs, appealed against a declaration that the respondent, Lee, is an Australian citizen. The Federal Court was asked to determine if Lee, born in Papua prior to Independence Day, became a citizen of Papua New Guinea on that day, thereby losing his Australian citizenship. The dispute arose from the interplay between Australian and Papua New Guinean laws, specifically sections 64 and 65 of the PNG Constitution and regulation 4 of the Papua New Guinea Independence (Australian Citizenship) Regulation 1975 (Cth).

The court had to address whether Lee became a Papua New Guinean citizen on Independence Day and, if so, whether this would have made him an immigrant under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). Additionally, the court considered the concept of "immigration" as it relates to section 51(xxvii) of the Constitution. A key issue was whether Lee held a domicile of choice in Australia, given his parents were naturalised Australian citizens and held domicile in Australia. The court's analysis involved examining the unwritten law of Papua New Guinea, which was done by considering PNG law reports and legislation under sections 174 and 175 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth). The court provided the parties with an opportunity to submit further arguments on the additional material considered.

The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal. The reasoning was that Lee did not automatically become a Papua New Guinean citizen on Independence Day, and thus, he retained his Australian citizenship. The court determined that Lee had a domicile of choice in Australia, similar to his parents, which solidified his status as an Australian citizen. The decision underscored the importance of examining both Australian and Papua New Guinean laws to resolve the citizenship question.