Plaintiff S178A/2016 & Ors v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection & Anor

The applicants, identified as Plaintiff S178A/2016 and others, sought judicial review of decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and another respondent concerning their immigration status. The matter came before Gageler J of the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister's delegate had failed to exercise the power conferred by s 48B of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) in accordance with the law. Specifically, the applicants contended that the delegate had impermissibly fettered their discretion by adopting a policy that effectively precluded consideration of applications for a protection visa made by individuals who had previously been refused a visa and had not sought review of that refusal.

Gageler J reasoned that the power under s 48B of the *Migration Act* requires the delegate to consider each application on its merits, having regard to the specific circumstances of the applicant. His Honour held that the delegate's reliance on a policy that predetermined the outcome of applications, without genuine consideration of individual circumstances, amounted to an unlawful fettering of discretion. The legal principle applied was that a public authority exercising a statutory power must not adopt a rigid policy that prevents it from considering the specific facts of each case, thereby failing to exercise the discretion conferred upon it.

The Court found in favour of the applicants, quashing the decisions of the Minister's delegate and remitting the applications for reconsideration according to law.