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

Street J heard an application for a constitutional writ under s 476 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The Tribunal had affirmed a delegate's decision to refuse the applicants Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class EN) Visas because they lacked an approved nomination as required by cl 186.233(3) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The applicants had failed to appear at the Tribunal hearing, despite prior adjournments, and the Tribunal proceeded to make its decision.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the Tribunal had committed jurisdictional error, a miscarriage of justice, or failed to take into account a complete set of facts. The applicants contended that they had been misled by their agent regarding the need for an approved nomination and that their compelling and compassionate circumstances, including psychological and mental illness, had been ignored. They also argued that their history as diligent, law-abiding citizens had not been acknowledged.

Street J found that the applicants' grounds of appeal did not disclose an arguable case of relevant error. The Tribunal had correctly identified the applicable law, and the absence of an approved nomination was a fatal flaw to the visa application, rendering the reasons for its absence irrelevant to the Tribunal's review. The Tribunal's decision to proceed with the hearing, given the adjournments and the applicants' failure to attend, was found to have an evident and intelligible justification. Furthermore, compelling and compassionate circumstances were not a criterion that the Tribunal had the power to consider in this context. The Court concluded that the applicants' disagreement with the decision and their claims of being misled or having their circumstances ignored did not establish jurisdictional error.

The application for a constitutional writ was dismissed.