Sultan & Ors v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

The plaintiffs, Sultan and others, brought proceedings against the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs in the High Court of Australia. The dispute concerned the Minister's decision to refuse to grant visas to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs argued that the delegate's decision to refuse the visas was based on a misunderstanding of the role of State governments in the visa application process.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the delegate, in assessing the plaintiffs' visa applications, had adequately considered the pre-vetting and pre-qualification role undertaken by State governments in sponsoring applicants for the subclass 132 business visa. The plaintiffs contended that the State sponsorship process itself involved a rigorous assessment of applicants' suitability as migrants, and that the delegate ought to have given greater weight to this pre-existing vetting when making the decision.

The plaintiffs' submissions focused on the statutory scheme for the subclass 132 visa, highlighting that State sponsorship is a mandatory prerequisite for application. They referred to the Explanatory Memorandum for the regulations introducing the visa, which indicated an enhanced role for State and Territory Governments in sponsoring business migrants. The plaintiffs argued that this State vetting process, which often includes interviews and assessment of business credentials, meant that applicants put forward for sponsorship had already met significant suitability criteria. Therefore, when a delegate later assessed an application, the fact of State sponsorship was highly pertinent and relevant information that should have been considered more favourably.