Kamruzzaman v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 523

Kamruzzaman v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 523

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal had no prospects of success. The visa criterion requiring an approved nomination could not be met because the employer nomination had been refused and the nominator's review application had been withdrawn, so the Tribunal and the primary judge were correct to conclude that the visa review and judicial review applications were bound to fail. The Tribunal's written letter of 26 March 2019 identified the relevant information and invited comment, so there was no basis for the alleged non-compliance with the Migration Act provisions relied upon in the proposed appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment Dismissing Application for Judicial Review / Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['employer Nomination (permanent) (class En) Visas' 'sub Class 186 Visa' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'show Cause Dismissal' 'tribunal Procedural Fairness Information Invitation' 'leave to Appeal']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['employer Nomination (permanent) (class En) Visas' 'sub Class 186 Visa' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'show Cause Dismissal' 'tribunal Procedural Fairness Information Invitation' 'leave to Appeal']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment Dismissing Application for Judicial Review / Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court order dismissing the judicial review application under r 44.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).' 'Whether the primary judge erred in finding the judicial review application was bound to fail because the relevant nomination had not been approved.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s 359AA and/or s 359A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to information about the refusal and withdrawal of review of the employer nomination.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal had no prospects of success. The visa criterion requiring an approved nomination could not be met because the employer nomination had been refused and the nominator's review application had been withdrawn, so the Tribunal and the primary judge were correct to conclude that the visa review and judicial review applications were bound to fail. The Tribunal's written letter of 26 March 2019 identified the relevant information and invited comment, so there was no basis for the alleged non-compliance with the Migration Act provisions relied upon in the proposed appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The name of the first respondent be amended to Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs.' 'The application for leave to appeal the orders of the primary judge made on 17 August 2021 be dismissed.' "The first and second applicants pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]