Federal Court. Is it "illogical in the ordinary sense of the word for an administrative decision-maker to state that consideration has been given to evidentiary material in circumstances where no such consideration has been given"? At what point in time must the consideration of whether cancellation is in the national interest occur, pursuant to s 501BA(2)(b)? Can materiality be considered in the aggregate?
The Minister’s statement of reasons for his personal decision under s 501BA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) included the following passage:
11. I have … given consideration to representations made by [the applicant] in relation to the original decision and in the AAT proceedings which resulted in the AAT revoking the decision to cancel [the applicant’s] visa…
It was not in dispute before the Federal Court (FCA) that those representations were not before the Minister.
Some of the questions to the FCA were as follows:
Question 1: Was the Minister's assertion that he had considered the applicant's representations to the Tribunal better described as a false statement then as a finding?
Question 2: Is it "illogical in the ordinary sense of the word for an administrative decision-maker to state that consideration has been given to evidentiary material in circumstances where no such consideration has been given"?
Question 3: At what point in time must the consideration of whether cancellation is in the national interest occur, pursuant to s 501BA(2)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)?
Question 4: Can the materiality of errors be assessed in the aggregate or in its totality?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: