PQSM v Minister for Home Affairs

PQSM appealed against the decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, which dismissed his application for judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs to cancel his visa under section 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The delegate of the Minister had decided not to revoke the cancellation under section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act, and the Tribunal affirmed this decision. The primary judge dismissed the application for review, holding that the Tribunal had failed to consider the impact of non-revocation on the appellant's partner and two adult children, but this failure was not material and therefore not a jurisdictional error.

The court had to decide whether the primary judge erred in finding that the Tribunal's failure was not material. This required consideration of the principle of materiality, the breadth of application of Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] HCA 34; 264 CLR 123, and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA [2019] HCA 3; 264 CLR 421, as well as the standard of materiality to apply to failure to have regard to a consideration made mandatory under the Migration Act. The court held that the primary judge applied the correct standard of materiality and did not misapply the test. There was no appealable error disclosed.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs, to be assessed if not agreed. This case highlights the importance of considering the impact of a decision on relevant parties, even if the failure to do so is not considered material. The court's decision also reinforces the need for decision-makers to be aware of mandatory considerations and to take them into account when making decisions.