Plaintiff M150 of 2013 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Plaintiff S297/2013 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

In *Plaintiff M150 of 2013 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection* and *Plaintiff S297/2013 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection*, the plaintiffs sought, and were granted, writs of mandamus directing the Minister to consider and determine their applications for protection visas. The Minister subsequently sought an extension of the return date for these writs, primarily to consider a specific criterion for the grant of a protection visa, namely criterion 866.226 of Schedule 2 to the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The proceedings were before the High Court of Australia, presided over by French CJ.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether to grant the Minister's application for an extension of time to comply with the previously ordered writs of mandamus. This involved considering the Minister's stated need to assess the implications of a particular visa criterion and the potential impact of such an assessment on the plaintiffs' applications.

French CJ reasoned that the Minister's request for an extension was not sufficiently justified to override the existing orders for the determination of the protection visa applications. The Court noted that the Minister had not provided adequate grounds to warrant delaying the consideration and determination of the applications beyond the established timeframe. Consequently, the Court ordered that the writs of mandamus were to issue by close of business on 4 July 2014, with service to be effected by delivery to the office of the Australian Government Solicitor. The writs were to be returnable by 21 July 2014. In addition to the costs of the special case, the defendants were ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs for the remainder of the proceeding, with the exception of the challenge to the validity of the *Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrival) Regulation 2013* (Cth).