NBKM v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

In the case of NBKM v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, the appellants, a boy and his parents from China, appealed against the Federal Magistrates' decision to dismiss their application for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). The Tribunal's decision, made on 7 September 2006 and affirmed a decision of a delegate of the first respondent to refuse to grant protection visas to the appellants. The appellants argued that the Tribunal breached the "natural justice hearing rule" by not inviting them to a second hearing to give oral evidence. The Federal Magistrate dismissed the appellants' application and the appellants appealed against this decision.

The legal issues in this appeal were whether the Tribunal breached s 425 and s 422B of the Act by not inviting the appellants to a second hearing to give oral evidence. The appellants argued that the Tribunal was obliged to hold a second hearing to give them an opportunity to give oral evidence and arguments at a hearing. The first respondent argued that the Tribunal was entitled to rely on the transcript of the first hearing and the summary of the evidence recorded in its previous reasons.

The Court found that the Tribunal did not breach s 425 and s 422B of the Act by not inviting the appellants to a second hearing. The Court found that the Tribunal was entitled to take into account information of claims that had been made to the earlier Tribunal at the hearing. The Court found that the Tribunal still had before it the materials that were obtained when the decision that had been set aside was made. The Court found that the Tribunal's decision to rely on the transcript of the first hearing and the summary of the evidence recorded in its previous reasons did not impair its capacity to make a proper assessment of that evidence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.