CCW19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 480

CCW19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 480

The Tribunal did not unreasonably fail to consider the exercise of its discretionary power to call oral evidence from the nominated witness under s 427(1)(a) of the Migration Act because the request was made out of time, the Tribunal had before it the relevant information from related proceedings, and inconsistencies in the evidence of proposed witnesses provided justification for not calling further evidence. The Tribunal's reasons and the procedural history did not disclose error, nor was any denial of procedural fairness shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to raise new ground denied; costs awarded to first respondent.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'exercise of Statutory Discretion' 'tribunal Procedure']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'exercise of Statutory Discretion' 'tribunal Procedure']

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

Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal unreasonably failed to consider exercise of its power under s 427(1)(a) of the Migration Act to call oral evidence from a nominated witness' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to give real and genuine consideration to a request to call a witness']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal did not unreasonably fail to consider the exercise of its discretionary power to call oral evidence from the nominated witness under s 427(1)(a) of the Migration Act because the request was made out of time, the Tribunal had before it the relevant information from related proceedings, and inconsistencies in the evidence of proposed witnesses provided justification for not calling further evidence. The Tribunal's reasons and the procedural history did not disclose error, nor was any denial of procedural fairness shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to raise new ground denied; costs awarded to first respondent.

Orders

  • ['The appellants are denied leave to rely on their proposed new ground.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' "The first appellant and the second appellant must pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or taxed."]