Salma v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 356

Salma v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 356

The Tribunal did not commit jurisdictional error by relying on the RMOC's opinion, as the RMOC was not required to take into account individual State circumstances or completed NDIS rollout in NSW and was correct to follow national guidance as the NDIS was not yet nationally implemented. The inclusion of State costs in the opinion was not legally erroneous in the circumstances.

Parties
First Appellant: Umme Salma; Second Appellant: S M Makeem Arham; Third Appellant: S M Safeen Arham; Fourth Appellant: S M Didar Hossain; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Interest Criterion 4005, Temporary Graduate Visa, Health Requirement, Jurisdictional Error, Judicial Review
Migration Law Administrative Law Public Interest Criterion 4005 Temporary Graduate Visa Health Requirement Jurisdictional Error 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 2 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umme Salma

First Appellant

S M Makeem Arham

Second Appellant

S M Safeen Arham

Third Appellant

S M Didar Hossain

Fourth Appellant

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal's decision was affected by jurisdictional error due to reliance on a defective RMOC opinion under PIC 4005.
  2. 2 Whether the RMOC erred by including State disability services costs post-NDIS rollout in NSW.
  3. 3 Whether NDIS service payments are 'social security payments' excluded from PIC 4005(3) cost assessment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal did not commit jurisdictional error by relying on the RMOC's opinion, as the RMOC was not required to take into account individual State circumstances or completed NDIS rollout in NSW and was correct to follow national guidance as the NDIS was not yet nationally implemented. The inclusion of State costs in the opinion was not legally erroneous in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs.