Plaintiff M1/2021 v Minister for Home Affairs

The High Court of Australia considered the case of Plaintiff M1/2021 against the Minister for Home Affairs. The dispute concerned the lawfulness of the Minister's decision to refuse to revoke a non-revocation notice under s 197D of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This notice prevented the plaintiff, who was a child and a victim of human trafficking, from being granted a protection visa. The plaintiff argued that the Minister's decision was invalid because it was based on a misinterpretation of the relevant statutory provisions and that the Minister failed to consider relevant considerations.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Minister, in deciding whether to revoke a non-revocation notice under s 197D of the *Migration Act*, was required to consider the best interests of the child. The plaintiff contended that the Minister's failure to do so rendered the decision unlawful. The Court also had to determine the proper construction of s 197D and its interaction with other provisions of the *Migration Act*, particularly those relating to the protection of victims of human trafficking and the best interests of children.

The High Court held that the Minister's power to revoke a non-revocation notice under s 197D was not conditioned on considering the best interests of the child. The Court reasoned that the statutory language of s 197D did not impose such a requirement, and that the Minister's discretion was to be exercised according to the purposes of that section, which were distinct from the broader considerations that might apply in other contexts concerning children. The Court found that the Minister had correctly interpreted and applied the law as it stood, and therefore the decision to refuse to revoke the notice was lawful.