Applicant A73/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 691

Applicant A73/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 691

Each amended application advanced boilerplate Muin procedural fairness grounds but was unsupported by affidavit or other evidence. Although the applicants were given liberty to file affidavit material to lay a factual foundation, they did not do so. In the complete absence of evidence establishing the factual substratum necessary for the claims, the Minister's motions were allowed and the amended applications were struck out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Applications for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions Affirming Refusals of Protection Visas / Respondent Minister's Motions to Strike Out the Amended Applications
Outcome
All seven applications were struck out; consideration of costs was adjourned to a date to be fixed.
Legal Topics
['refugee Protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'muin Challenges' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'motion to Strike Out' 'factual Substratum']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['refugee Protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'muin Challenges' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'motion to Strike Out' 'factual Substratum']

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

Applications for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions Affirming Refusals of Protection Visas / Respondent Minister's Motions to Strike Out the Amended Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicants' Muin-based procedural fairness grounds disclosed a viable basis for judicial review without affidavit evidence or other evidence establishing the necessary factual substratum." 'Whether the amended applications should be struck out for lack of evidence supporting the allegations made.']

Ratio Decidendi

Each amended application advanced boilerplate Muin procedural fairness grounds but was unsupported by affidavit or other evidence. Although the applicants were given liberty to file affidavit material to lay a factual foundation, they did not do so. In the complete absence of evidence establishing the factual substratum necessary for the claims, the Minister's motions were allowed and the amended applications were struck out.

Court Disposition

All seven applications were struck out; consideration of costs was adjourned to a date to be fixed.

Orders

  • ['The application be struck out.' 'The consideration of costs be adjourned to a date to be fixed.']