Morgan and Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations

The matter before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerned an application by Mr Morgan and others for review of a decision by the Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations not to register changes to the constitution of the BAC corporation. The applicants had purported to pass these changes at a general meeting that was not formally called by the BAC directors. The Registrar’s delegate refused registration on the basis that the meeting was not convened in accordance with the corporation's rules and the relevant legislation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was the scope of its review powers. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine whether it could exercise powers vested in the Registrar under provisions of the *Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006* (CATSI Act) that were not the subject of the original decision under review. The applicants contended that the Tribunal should adopt a broader, more facilitative approach, potentially exercising powers to call a general meeting itself, rather than strictly reviewing the Registrar's decision on registration.

The Tribunal applied established principles regarding the scope of administrative review, drawing on case law such as *Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v PDWL* and *Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Apted*. It held that its jurisdiction, as conferred by s 623–1 of the CATSI Act, was limited to reviewing the specific decision referred to it, which in this instance was the Registrar's refusal to register the constitutional changes under s 69–30 of the CATSI Act. The Tribunal reasoned that it could only exercise the powers and discretions that the original decision-maker (the Registrar) possessed in relation to that specific decision. Therefore, powers available to the Registrar under other sections of the CATSI Act, such as s 439–10(1)(d) which allows for calling a general meeting, were outside the scope of the review because no decision had been made by the Registrar under that section, nor was such a decision being sought for review.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the scope of its review was confined to considering whether the changes to the Rule Book sought by the applicants should be registered by the Registrar under s 69–30 of the CATSI Act. The Tribunal would not exercise powers to call a meeting or engage in broader interventions beyond the specific decision under review.