Kumar v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1580

Kumar v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1580

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal lacked merit. The first applicant could not satisfy the Subclass 186 visa criteria requiring an approved employer nomination, as the nomination had not been approved when the Tribunal decided the matter. The primary judge had carefully considered and rejected each judicial review ground as not arguable, the applicants were on notice of the show cause hearing, and no arguable error by the primary judge was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Leave to Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia Judicial Review Dismissal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, with costs payable by the applicants to the first respondent.
Legal Topics
['employer Nomination (permanent) (class En) Visa' 'subclass 186 Visa' 'approved Employer Nomination' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'show Cause Hearing']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['employer Nomination (permanent) (class En) Visa' 'subclass 186 Visa' 'approved Employer Nomination' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'show Cause Hearing']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Application for Leave to Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia Judicial Review Dismissal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from interlocutory orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissing the applicants' judicial review applications." "Whether the proposed appeal had any merit where the employer nomination for the first applicant's position had not been approved." 'Whether the primary judge erred in concluding that the judicial review grounds were not arguable.' 'Whether the applicants were on notice of the show cause nature of the Federal Circuit Court hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal lacked merit. The first applicant could not satisfy the Subclass 186 visa criteria requiring an approved employer nomination, as the nomination had not been approved when the Tribunal decided the matter. The primary judge had carefully considered and rejected each judicial review ground as not arguable, the applicants were on notice of the show cause hearing, and no arguable error by the primary judge was shown.

Court Disposition

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, with costs payable by the applicants to the first respondent.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]