Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Serevi

The case between the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Mr Serevi involved the validity of an order made under the Migration Act. The High Court of Australia was asked to determine the scope of judicial review available in cases concerning ministerial decisions made under the Act. Mr Serevi, a national of Fiji, had been the subject of a decision by the Minister to cancel his visa on the grounds of character, and he sought judicial review of that decision. The primary issue for the court was whether the court could review the Minister's decision on the basis of whether the decision-maker exercised his discretion in an irrational or Wednesbury unreasonable manner.

The court considered the nature of the decision-making process under the Migration Act and the extent to which the courts could intervene in such decisions. The High Court concluded that the scope of judicial review in this context was limited. The court held that the decision of the Minister was not subject to review on the ground of irrationality or unreasonableness unless it was so palpably wrong that no reasonable person could have made it. The court emphasised the importance of deference to the decision-maker in matters of immigration and character, given the specialised knowledge and expertise required in such areas.

Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered Mr Serevi to pay the respondent’s costs. The High Court's decision underscored the principle of deference to the decision-maker in immigration matters, limiting the scope of judicial review to cases where the decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made it.