- QYFM v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor  HCA 15
- BDO v The Queen  HCA 16
COURTS AND JUDGES
In QYFM v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor  HCA 15 (17 May 2023), the High Court was required to consider whether a judge (Bromwich J), sitting as part of the Full Court of the Federal Court, should have recused himself from the hearing of an appeal by reason of a ‘reasonable apprehension of bias’ (at ). In addressing this question, the High Court also addressed the ancillary question of whether the Full Court, and not Bromwich J alone, should have determined the appellant’s application that Bromwich J recuse himself.
The appellant is a citizen of Burkina Faso. In 2013, the appellant was convicted of a drug importation offence and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years with a non-parole period of seven years. The appellant unsuccessfully appealed against his conviction (‘Conviction Appeal’). Before his elevation to the bench, Bromwich J was a senior barrister who occupied the position of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. While in this position, Bromwich J appeared for the Crown in the Conviction Appeal.
In 2017, a delegate of the Minister made the decision, pursuant to s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), to cancel the appellant’s visa on the basis that the appellant did not pass the ‘character test’ by reason of the sentence of imprisonment (at ). In 2019, another delegate of the Minister decided not to revoke the cancellation of the appellant’s visa (the ‘Decision’). The appellant sought a review of the Decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (‘AAT’). The AAT affirmed the decision.