Salh & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor

The applicants, Mr and Mrs Salh, sought judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) to affirm the refusal of their Subclass 457 Business (Long Stay) visa. The Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs was the respondent. The core of the dispute concerned the Tribunal's assessment of the applicants' eligibility for the visa in light of amendments to the *Migration Regulations 1994* that took effect in 2018.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Court was whether the Tribunal had committed a jurisdictional error by failing to consider all relevant material evidence, thereby denying the applicants procedural fairness. Specifically, the applicants contended that the Tribunal overlooked or failed to adequately address evidence they had provided concerning their compliance with the visa requirements.

Justice Cameron found that while the Tribunal's decision-making process may have been imperfect, any alleged denial of procedural fairness was not material to the ultimate outcome. The Court applied the principle that a failure to consider all evidence does not automatically constitute jurisdictional error if that failure does not affect the decision reached. In this instance, the Court determined that even if the Tribunal had considered the disputed evidence, the outcome of the review would have been the same.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.