Federal Court (Full Court). Can it be said that, "if executive power is to be exercised with a conscious understanding that it will result in the long term separation of a child from a loving and supporting parent with likely long term harm to the children then, given the nature of the obligation to give reasons in the present case, it is to be expected that the seriousness of that consequence and its consideration would both be manifested expressly in the reasons of the Minister"?
Some of the questions to the Full Court of the Federal Court (FCAFC) were as follows:
Question 1: Pursuant to s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), if a state of satisfaction is formed that there is 'another reason' why an original decision cancelling the visa should be revoked, must the Minister then revoke the cancellation? Or is there a residual discretion not to revoke the cancellation?
Question 2: For the purpose of s 501CA(4), can it be said that, "where there are a number of reasons put forward then they should all be considered together"?
Question 3: Can it be said that, the more serious the allegation made to support the claim that an administrative decision-maker failed to give 'proper, genuine and realistic consideration' to representations made, "the more circumspection that the Court brings to bear"?
Question 4: Can it be said that, "if executive power is to be exercised with a conscious understanding that it will result in the long term separation of a child from a loving and supporting parent with likely long term harm to the children then, given the nature of the obligation to give reasons in the present case, it is to be expected that the seriousness of that consequence and its consideration would both be manifested expressly in the reasons of the Minister"?
The FCAFC answered those questions as follows: