Sefat and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Anor (No.2)

The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Sefat, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning their application for a Business Skills (Residence) visa. The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection was the respondent. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation of the term "ownership interest" and "sole proprietor" as defined in the relevant migration regulations.

The court was required to determine whether the AAT had erred in law by misinterpreting and misapplying the statutory definitions of "ownership interest" and "sole proprietor" when assessing the applicants' eligibility for the visa. Specifically, the applicants contended that the Tribunal's findings on these points constituted a jurisdictional error, rendering its decision invalid.

Justice Heffernan found that the AAT had indeed made a jurisdictional error. The Tribunal's interpretation of "ownership interest" failed to give full effect to the statutory definition, which required consideration of the applicants' beneficial interest in the business, not merely their legal title. Furthermore, the Tribunal's conclusion that the applicants were not "sole proprietors" was based on an erroneous understanding of that term in the context of their business structure. The court concluded that the errors demonstrated by the applicants were of a kind that vitiated the Tribunal's decision.

Writs of certiorari were issued, quashing the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.