RATNAYAKA MUDIYANSELAGE (Migration)

The applicant, Ratnayaka Mudiyanselage, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning a Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa. The dispute centred on the applicant's failure to provide a Complete Disclosure Certificate to the Department of Home Affairs at the time of their visa application, a requirement for the Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa. The certificate was subsequently provided to the Tribunal during the review process. The matter was heard by Mercer J in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had erred in law by failing to consider the Complete Disclosure Certificate provided after the initial application, and whether this failure constituted an error in the Tribunal's assessment of the applicant's eligibility for the visa. The court was required to determine the proper application of the relevant migration regulations and the Tribunal's obligations in considering evidence presented during its review.

Mercer J found that the Tribunal had erred in law by not considering the Complete Disclosure Certificate, which was provided before the Tribunal made its decision. The court reasoned that the Tribunal had a duty to consider all relevant information before it when making a decision, and that the certificate was relevant to the applicant's eligibility. The court applied the principles of administrative law, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and the Tribunal's obligation to conduct a merits review. Consequently, the court remitted the decision to the Tribunal for redetermination according to law.