YI and Ors v Minister For Immigration and Anor (No.2)

This matter concerned an application for judicial review brought by the applicants, YI and others, against the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The applicants sought to challenge decisions made by the Minister concerning their immigration status, which were influenced by adverse security assessments provided by ASIO. The proceedings were heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister was entitled to rely on adverse security assessments provided by ASIO, which were not disclosed to the applicants, when making decisions about their visa applications and whether to grant them a protection visa. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the Minister's reliance on these undisclosed assessments breached the principles of procedural fairness, and if the applicants had a right to be informed of the substance of the adverse information and to respond to it.

Justice Street found that while the Minister was required to consider ASIO assessments, the applicants were not entitled to disclosure of the full adverse assessments due to national security concerns. However, the Court held that the Minister had a duty to afford procedural fairness to the applicants. This duty required the Minister to inform the applicants of the *nature* of the adverse information in sufficient detail to allow them a meaningful opportunity to respond, even if the precise source or full content of the information could not be disclosed. The Court considered that the Minister had failed to provide this adequate opportunity to respond in the present case.

Consequently, the Court made orders setting aside the decisions of the Minister and remitting the matters back to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.