SINGH v Minister for Immigration

Singh (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration. The dispute concerned the applicant's contention that a particular finding of fact made by the Tribunal was "unreasonable". The matter came before Judge Howard.

The legal issue before the court was whether the principle of "Wednesbury unreasonableness" could be applied to an individual finding of fact made by the Tribunal, or if it was confined to the validity of discretionary decisions.

Judge Howard reasoned that the principle of "Wednesbury unreasonableness", as established in *Associated Provincial Picture Houses Limited v Wednesbury Corporation* and elaborated upon in *Minister for Immigration & Citizenship v Li*, applies only to the review of discretionary decisions. His Honour noted that the High Court in *Li* and the Federal Court in *MZYNN* and *SZOOR v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship* have made it clear that this standard of unreasonableness is not applicable to individual findings of fact. Therefore, the applicant's contention that the Tribunal's finding of fact was unreasonable could not be relied upon.