NARY v MIMIA

The case of *Nary v MIMIA* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by Mr Nary against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute arose from the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs' decision to refuse Mr Nary's application for a protection visa. Mr Nary, an asylum seeker, alleged he had a well-founded fear of persecution in his country of origin.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Minister's delegate had failed to consider relevant considerations, specifically Mr Nary's claims of past persecution and his fear of future persecution, when assessing his application for a protection visa. The central legal issue was whether the delegate's decision-making process had been vitiated by a failure to take into account a non-personal, but relevant, consideration, thereby rendering the decision unlawful under the *Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977* (Cth).

In their joint judgment, Hayne and Callinan JJ found that the delegate's reasons for decision did not demonstrate that the delegate had properly considered the evidence relating to Mr Nary's claims of past persecution and his fear of future persecution. Their Honours held that the delegate had failed to take into account a relevant consideration, namely the evidence supporting Mr Nary's claims, which was a ground for judicial review. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Federal Court for further consideration.