[3] In April 1908, before the Victorian Court of Petty Sessions, Minahan was recognised to have remained domiciled in Victoria since birth and therefore could not be considered an immigrant under the Act.

Minahan was represented by Frank Gavan Duffy, later Chief Justice, and William Ah Ket, the first Chinese-Australian barrister.

[4][3] The joint judgement concurred with the lower court and held that Minahan had maintained his domicile in Australia since birth.

Section 51 of the Australian constitution (immigration power) was ruled not to give the Commonwealth the capacity to restrict the entry of people who already had established their right of residency.

[5] Issacs and Higgins JJ concurred in the result but found for the defendant on a narrower basis, i.e. that the dictation test prescribed by the Immigration Restriction Act had not actually been performed on Minahan.