Parvez v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

The applicant, Mr. Parvez, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to refuse his application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa. The Minister's decision was based on the applicant's failure to meet the criteria for a genuine and continuing relationship, as required by s 61(1)(c) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth) and Schedule 3 of those Regulations. The matter came before Street J of the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate of the Minister had erred in law by failing to consider, or adequately consider, all the evidence before them when assessing the genuineness of Mr. Parvez's relationship with his sponsor. Specifically, the Court was asked to determine if the delegate had unlawfully fettered their discretion by applying a rigid, predetermined approach to the assessment of relationship evidence, thereby failing to engage with the specific circumstances of the applicant's case.

Street J found that the delegate had indeed erred in law. The delegate's decision-making process demonstrated a failure to properly consider the entirety of the evidence presented by the applicant, particularly concerning the duration and nature of the relationship. The Court held that the delegate had applied an overly restrictive interpretation of the evidentiary requirements, effectively requiring a level of proof that was not mandated by the legislation. This led to an unreasonable and unlawful assessment of the applicant's eligibility for the visa. The Court quashed the Minister's decision and remitted the matter to the Minister for redetermination according to law.