SZSZM v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

The applicant, a detainee, sought a declaration from the Federal Circuit Court that a decision by the Minister for Immigration to ban mobile phone possession and use in immigration detention was invalid. The applicant also sought declarations regarding the authority of respondents to search detainees and retain mobile phones, and whether procedural fairness had been denied. The court noted that proceedings seeking essentially the same relief had been commenced in the Federal Court of Australia by other detainees, and an interlocutory injunction had been granted in those proceedings which broadly restrained the seizure of mobile phones from detainees.

The primary legal issues before the Federal Circuit Court were whether it had jurisdiction to hear the matter, particularly in light of the parallel proceedings in the Federal Court. The court also had to consider the substantive issues raised by the applicant concerning the validity of the Minister's decision, the authority to seize phones, and the denial of procedural fairness. The court's determination of these issues was complicated by the existence of the broader interlocutory injunction in the Federal Court and the potential for a final decision from a higher court to take precedence.

The court acknowledged that while it was its duty to determine the issues before it, the rights of the parties would ultimately be determined in the Federal Court proceedings. The court referred to the High Court's decision in *Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth*, which held that the privative clause in section 474(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) did not preclude judicial review of decisions affected by jurisdictional error. The court also noted amendments to the *Migration Act* that introduced the concept of "migration decisions" and altered the jurisdictional landscape between the Federal Circuit Court and the Federal Court. The court found that the applicant's application was dismissed.