WACO v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

In WACO v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs, the appellant, an Iranian national, sought review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal which had dismissed his application for a visa on the grounds that he did not have a genuine fear of persecution and that there was not a real chance that he would face persecution upon his return to Iran. The appellant had alleged that he had a close relationship with Ayatollah Shirazi, a prominent Iranian cleric, and that he had been involved in anti-regime activities. The Tribunal had rejected his claims and found him not to be a credible witness. The central issues in the appeal were whether the Tribunal had denied the appellant an opportunity to be heard and whether it had failed to take into account relevant considerations.

The court found that the Tribunal had not denied the appellant an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal had raised the inconsistencies in the appellant's evidence regarding the time and nature of the house arrest of Ayatollah Shirazi and allowed the appellant to provide further documents potentially evidencing his relationship with the Ayatollah. The court held that it was not authorised to engage in merits review of the weight the Tribunal placed on the appellant's evidence. The court also found that the Tribunal had not failed to take into account relevant considerations. The court held that a Tribunal may make a jurisdictional error if it takes into account irrelevant considerations or fails to take into account relevant considerations. However, the court held that it was sufficient in such a case that the party has not been afforded an opportunity to put his or her case and that only where the case is one where it can be shown that the appellant could not, even if given the opportunity to do so, affect the outcome would it be held that there was no denial of procedural fairness.

The court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders made by the Court on 21 August 2002 and remitted the applicant's application for a visa to the Tribunal for redetermination according to law. The court also ordered the respondent to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.