NAWO v MIMIA

The applicants, NAWO and others, sought judicial review of decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (MIMIA) to refuse to grant them protection visas. The applicants were asylum seekers who had arrived in Australia by boat. The Minister's decisions were based on the assessment that the applicants did not meet the criteria for a protection visa under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

The central legal issue before the High Court of Australia was whether the Minister's decisions were vitiated by a failure to afford the applicants procedural fairness. Specifically, the applicants contended that they were not given adequate notice of, or opportunity to respond to, adverse information that the Minister proposed to rely upon in refusing their protection visa applications. This adverse information related to the applicants' claims of persecution in their country of origin.

Gleeson CJ and Gummow J held that the Minister's duty to afford procedural fairness extended to providing applicants with notice of adverse information that was material to the decision and an opportunity to respond to it. Their Honours reasoned that the statutory framework governing protection visa applications contemplated a process where applicants could present their case fully, and this included addressing any negative material that might lead to a refusal. The failure to provide such an opportunity meant that the decisions were made in breach of the rules of natural justice, rendering them invalid.

Consequently, the High Court made orders quashing the Minister's decisions to refuse the protection visas and remitted the applications to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.