SZCQX v MIMIA & Anor

The applicants, SZCQX and MIMIA, brought proceedings before the High Court of Australia concerning the interpretation of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The central dispute revolved around the lawfulness of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to refuse to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Minister's decision was vitiated by a failure to consider relevant considerations, specifically the applicant's claims of substantial prejudice to their interests if removed from Australia. The core legal question was whether the Minister, in exercising the power to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation under s 501(12) of the *Migration Act*, was bound to consider all submissions made by the visa holder, including those relating to substantial prejudice.

The Court reasoned that the power to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation under s 501(12) is a discretionary power. However, like all discretionary powers, it must be exercised according to law. This includes considering all relevant considerations and disregarding irrelevant ones. The Court held that submissions concerning substantial prejudice to the applicant's interests were relevant considerations that the Minister was bound to consider when deciding whether to revoke the visa cancellation. A failure to consider such relevant material would render the Minister's decision unlawful.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Minister had failed to consider relevant considerations. The matter was remitted to the Federal Court of Australia for further consideration.