Lymlind Pty Ltd & Ors v Parianos, G. & Ors [1995] FCA 554

Lymlind Pty Ltd & Ors v Parianos, G. & Ors [1995] FCA 554

There was no evidence that the applicants, prior to 30 December 1994, made any application, constructive or otherwise, for protection visas in conformity with statutory requirements or providing the necessary information to engage Australia's protection obligations. There was neither procedural unfairness nor denial of legal advice by the respondents, nor any legitimate expectation created by the authorities' conduct or representations. Constructive application for a protection visa is not recognised under the legislative scheme, and informal steps taken by the applicants (forms, compliance interviews, statements) did not amount to substantial compliance or grounds for relief. Allegations...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 1995
Procedural Posture
Application for Declarations and Remedies Under Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) and Judiciary Act 1901 (cth) / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['refugee Status Determination' 'procedural Fairness' 'constructive Application for Visa' 'safe Third Country' 'legitimate Expectation' 'statutory Interpretation']
['immigration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['refugee Status Determination' 'procedural Fairness' 'constructive Application for Visa' 'safe Third Country' 'legitimate Expectation' 'statutory Interpretation']

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

Application for Declarations and Remedies Under Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth) and Judiciary Act 1901 (cth) / Final Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants made constructive applications for protection visas before 30 December 1994 under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' 'Whether officers of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (DIEA) were required to inform or assist the applicants in making protection visa applications' 'Whether there was a denial of procedural fairness or denial of legal advice' 'Whether there was an actionable assault on Chen Yuan Fa' 'Whether there was legitimate expectation or estoppel as to their right to apply for protection visas']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence that the applicants, prior to 30 December 1994, made any application, constructive or otherwise, for protection visas in conformity with statutory requirements or providing the necessary information to engage Australia's protection obligations. There was neither procedural unfairness nor denial of legal advice by the respondents, nor any legitimate expectation created by the authorities' conduct or representations. Constructive application for a protection visa is not recognised under the legislative scheme, and informal steps taken by the applicants (forms, compliance interviews, statements) did not amount to substantial compliance or grounds for relief. Allegations...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' 'As to consequential issues, the matter be adjourned sine die.' 'Liberty to any party to bring the matter back for any further hearing on seven days notice.']