ELR18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 1583

ELR18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 1583

The appeal was dismissed because none of the appellants' grounds was made out. The Federal Circuit Court considered and refused the adjournment application, and the appellants identified no House v R error in that discretionary decision. The procedural fairness complaints did not show appellable error: the appellants had no civil right to legal representation, the focus of questioning on the second appellant was not unfair, the use of a telephone interpreter did not itself deny fairness, and dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's rejection of their evidence was not procedural unfairness. Although the ex tempore reasons were not interpreted and written reasons were published after the appeal...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Protection Visa Appeal From Judicial Review Proceeding / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adjournment' 'procedural Fairness' 'ex Tempore Reasons' 'interpreters' 'judicial Review']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'appellate Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adjournment' 'procedural Fairness' 'ex Tempore Reasons' 'interpreters' 'judicial Review']

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 Protection Visa Appeal From Judicial Review Proceeding / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Federal Circuit Court of Australia erred by refusing the appellants an adjournment to seek legal representation.' 'Whether the appellants were denied procedural fairness before the Tribunal or the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.' 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court of Australia failed to provide reasons, or whether the non-interpretation of ex tempore reasons and delay in publishing written reasons amounted to appellable error.' 'Whether the Tribunal decision refusing protection visas was affected by jurisdictional error.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because none of the appellants' grounds was made out. The Federal Circuit Court considered and refused the adjournment application, and the appellants identified no House v R error in that discretionary decision. The procedural fairness complaints did not show appellable error: the appellants had no civil right to legal representation, the focus of questioning on the second appellant was not unfair, the use of a telephone interpreter did not itself deny fairness, and dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's rejection of their evidence was not procedural unfairness. Although the ex tempore reasons were not interpreted and written reasons were published after the appeal...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellants are to pay the first respondent's costs, to be assessed or agreed."]