Sheridan (Migration)

The applicant, Mr Sheridan, sought judicial review of the decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to revoke the cancellation of his Employer Nomination Permanent (EN) visa, Subclass 186. The visa had been cancelled due to the provision of incorrect information regarding the job description for the nominated position. Mr Sheridan contended that updated evidence, which correctly reflected his work history and experience as an electrician, should have been considered. The matter came before the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister, or their delegate, had erred in law by failing to consider the further updated evidence provided by Mr Sheridan when determining whether to revoke the visa cancellation. Specifically, the Court was required to consider the scope of the delegate's duty to consider evidence in the context of a request for revocation of a visa cancellation, particularly where that evidence sought to correct previous inaccuracies.

The Court found that the delegate had failed to properly consider the updated evidence provided by Mr Sheridan. It was held that the delegate's duty extended to considering all relevant information placed before them, including evidence that corrected or clarified previous submissions. The Court applied the principle that a decision-maker must act fairly and consider all material relevant to the exercise of their discretion. By failing to give due weight to the evidence demonstrating Mr Sheridan's correct work history and experience as an electrician, the delegate had failed to undertake the required assessment.

The Court ordered that the decision of the delegate be set aside and remitted to the delegate for redetermination according to law.