On 6 September 2017, the High Court handed down its judgement in Graham v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Te Puia v Minister for Immigration. The High Court, with Justice Edelman dissenting, held that the Minister’s decision to cancel Mr Graham and Mr Te Puia’s Subclass 444 visas were invalid and the non-disclosure of information by virtue of s. 503A(2) of the Migration Act 1958 was invalid to the extent only that s. 503A(2)(c) would apply to prevent the Minister from being required to divulge or communicate information to this Court when exercising jurisdiction under s. 75(v) of the Constitution, or to the Federal Court when exercising jurisdiction under s 476A(1)(c) and (2) of the Migration Act 1958, to review a purported exercise of power by the Minister under ss. 501, 501A, 501B or 501C to which the information is relevant.
Amazingly, the Minister took less than one (1) hour to issue another decision cancelling Mr Graham and Mr Te Puia’s again and requiring them to continue to remain in immigration detention.
The team at Irish Bentley Lawyers have extensive experience in Migration Law and have recently won the Acquisition International’s 2015 Global Mobility, Immigration and Logistics award in this area. If you have a migration issue, then please do not hesitate to contact the team at Irish Bentley Lawyers – there is no substitute for proper legal advice based on your individual and unique circumstances.