Siong and Migration Agents Registration Authority

This matter concerned an application by Mr Siong for review of a decision by the Migration Agents Registration Authority (MARA) to refuse his registration as a migration agent. Mr Siong sought to issue a summons for documents from the Queensland Law Society (QLS) as part of the review process. The dispute centred on the relevance and scope of documents that could be sought and considered by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in its review of MARA's decision.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the documents sought by Mr Siong were relevant to the Tribunal's determination of whether MARA's decision was correct or preferable, and whether the Tribunal's jurisdiction on review was limited to the matters considered by the original decision-maker. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the proposed summons constituted a "fishing expedition" and whether new issues could be raised before the Tribunal based on documents obtained through the summons.

The Tribunal reasoned that the test for relevance was one of apparent relevance, given the subject matter of the dispute, which was whether Mr Siong was a fit and proper person to be a registered migration agent. It was held that the Tribunal's function on review was not limited to the material before the original decision-maker, but rather to determine the correct or preferable decision based on the material before the Tribunal. The Tribunal affirmed that new material could be considered and that the scope of the review was not confined to the specific issues raised in the show cause notice.

Ultimately, the Tribunal authorised the issue of an amended summons against the QLS for specific documents relating to investigations, disciplinary actions, and communications concerning Mr Siong's practising certificate, termination of employment, trust accounting, professional indemnity insurance, insolvency, and any legal or disciplinary actions taken against him. These documents were considered to have logical, not speculative, relevance to the Tribunal's determination.