This case note provides an overview of key facts and findings of the High Court of Australia in Plaintiff M96A/2016 v Commonwealth of Australia  HCA 16 The case concerns the Commonwealth’s detention of asylum seekers transferred to Australia from Nauru to receive medical treatment. More information about the processing of asylum seekers in Nauru is available through the Kaldor Centre factsheets.
In this case, the High Court considered whether procedural fairness was owed and provided in the International Treaty Obligations Assessment (ITOA) process to asylum seekers affected by the release of personal information on the internet by the Department of Immigration (known as ‘the Data Breach’). The High Court confirmed that procedural fairness is owed in the ITOA process. In this case, procedural fairness was found to be provided to the respondents in spite of the Data Breach, as they were still provided with a full opportunity for their case to be heard.
This case note provides an overview of the key facts and findings of the Federal Court of Australia in Plaintiff S99/2016 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection  FCA 483 (Plaintiff S99). The case was originally filed in the High Court before it was referred to Bromberg J in the Federal Court for an urgent hearing and determination.