It is telling how often Project Blue Sky (PBS) guides the resolution of difficult issues, as the recent decision in MZAPC illustrates1. An officer had the duty to remove an unlawful non-citizen ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ after refusal of a visa2. The officer declined to refer a request for a different visa to the minister, and the issue became whether the Federal Court could restrain removal by injunction. Answer – yes. Application of PBS principles meant the obligation to remove is read to accommodate the jurisdiction to prevent removal. The plurality (at [33]) said the statute was to be construed as being ‘intended to give effect to harmonious goals’. Conflicts are to be alleviated ‘by adjusting the meaning of the competing provisions’ to give effect to their purpose as a whole. The aim is to produce harmony both inside the statute and with other federal legislation3.
Gordon Brysland – Tax Counsel Network gordon.brysland@ato.gov.au 0417 605 338
See here for the official PDF of Episode 118 of interpretation NOW!
Thanks – Oliver Hood, Agnes Liu, Charlie Yu, Patrick Boyd.
Footnotes:
1 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v MZAPC [2025] HCA 5.
2 s 198(6) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
3 Eaton [2013] HCA 2 [98], cf plurality [43-44].