It was open to Immigration Minister Alex Hawke to infer that Novak Djokovic had refused to get vaccinated and that his presence in Australia might "foster anti-vaccination sentiment", the Federal Court says.
A three-judge panel of the court has published the full reasons why it ruled unanimously against the men's tennis world No.1 in an 11th-hour hearing the day before the Australian Open started.
Mr Hawke needed to be satisfied of the potential risk to the "health, safety or good order" of the community to cancel Djokovic's visa. The court found he did so on grounds that "cannot be said to be irrational or illogical or not based on relevant material".
Chief Justice James Allsop, Justice Besanko and Justice O'Callaghan said it was "plainly open" for Mr Hawke to infer that the 34-year-old had chosen not to get vaccinated because he was opposed to it.
They also said it was "not irrational" for Mr Hawke to be concerned Djokovic's presence may encourage anti-vaccination rallies - which could lead to community transmission - or otherwise discourage some people who had yet to get vaccinated from doing so.
"An iconic world tennis star may influence people of all ages, young or old, but perhaps especially the young and the impressionable, to emulate him," the judges said.
"This is not fanciful; it does not need evidence. It is the recognition of human behaviour from a modest familiarity with human experience.
"Even if Mr Djokovic did not win the Australian Open, the capacity of his presence in Australia playing tennis to encourage those who would emulate or wish to be like him is a rational foundation for the view that he might foster anti-vaccination sentiment."
Chief Justice Allsop earlier said that the decision did not involve an appeal against the decision of the Australian government.
Instead it was a judicial review hearing focused on whether the government's decision was irrational or unreasonable in a way that made it unlawful, he explained.
"It is not part of the function of the court to decide upon the merits or wisdom of the decision," Chief Justice Allsop said.
Djokovic had been set to launch the defence of his Australian Open title in the competition's opening round on Monday, but was instead deported to Serbia.
The 34-year-old may face a three-year ban on re-entering the country.
He's also been ordered to pay the federal government's legal costs.
Djokovic said in a statement that he was extremely disappointed with the court's decision to dismiss his application but that he respected its ruling.
"I will cooperate with the relevant authorities in relation to my departure from the country," he said.
He vowed to take time to rest and recuperate before making further comments.
The ruling ended an extraordinary saga that had the court sit for five hours on Sunday during its summer holiday, a highly unusual event that reflected the urgency and high stakes of the case.
Djokovic brought the case after his visa was cancelled for a second time on Friday afternoon.
The immigration minister cited a risk to public health and the chance that the unvaccinated Djokovic's presence in Australia could excite anti-vaccination sentiment.
Djokovic's visa had earlier been cancelled on the basis that he didn't have an exemption from the requirement to be vaccinated. That decision was revoked and the visa reinstated earlier last week.
