AVP17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1188

AVP17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1188

The appellants were served with material reminding them of the appeal hearing and did not appear when the appeal was called, justifying dismissal under r 36.75(1)(a)(i). In any event, each ground of appeal lacked substance: the Federal Circuit Court had considered the grounds, the Tribunal considered the appellants' ages and claims, the complaints largely challenged factual and credibility findings, and no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal or error by the primary judge was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Appeal Hearing in the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'procedural Fairness' 'dismissal of Appeal for Non Appearance' 'impermissible Merits Review']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'procedural Fairness' 'dismissal of Appeal for Non Appearance' 'impermissible Merits 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 Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Appeal Hearing in the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal should be dismissed under r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) because the appellants did not appear when the appeal was called on for hearing.' "Whether the primary judge erred in failing to find jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision affirming refusal of Protection (Class XA) visas." "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant claims or facts, including the appellants' ages when they met, claimed risks from Pakistani authorities and the TTP, risks to the appellant wife, and claimed Islamic social, customary and religious matters." "Whether the appellants' complaints amounted to impermissible merits review of the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants were served with material reminding them of the appeal hearing and did not appear when the appeal was called, justifying dismissal under r 36.75(1)(a)(i). In any event, each ground of appeal lacked substance: the Federal Circuit Court had considered the grounds, the Tribunal considered the appellants' ages and claims, the complaints largely challenged factual and credibility findings, and no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal or error by the primary judge was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to r 36.75(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) the appeal is dismissed.' 'The appellants pay the costs of the first respondent, as agreed or assessed.']