The Court held that the Administrative Review Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by failing to give individual consideration to the best interests of each of the applicant's three minor children under cl 8.4(3) of Direction No. 110, where evidence before the Tribunal differentiated the children's circumstances (including different ages, medical conditions, and relationships with the applicant), and the Tribunal instead addressed the two sons collectively without differentiation. The Court rejected the Minister's argument that the error was immaterial, holding that it would involve impermissible speculation to conclude the Tribunal would inevitably have reached the same decision had it properly weighed each child's interests individually. However, the Court rejected grounds alleging procedural unfairness and abrogation of the privilege against self-incrimination, finding that the Tribunal afforded the self-represented applicant a reasonable (though not every) opportunity to consider waiver of the privilege, and that the Tribunal's facilitative conduct during the hearing was sufficient in the circumstances known to it.
The full text is available to signed-in members.