Fernando v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 1320

Fernando v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 1320

The appeal failed because the first and second appellants entered Australia after 1 November 1993 and therefore did not satisfy cl 435.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), so the Tribunal and Federal Magistrate correctly determined that the appellants did not qualify for subclass 435 visas.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of a Migration Review Tribunal Decision / Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the appellants must pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['sri Lankan (temporary) (class Tt) Visas' 'subclass 435 Visa Eligibility' 'judicial Review' 'migration Review Tribunal']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['sri Lankan (temporary) (class Tt) Visas' 'subclass 435 Visa Eligibility' 'judicial Review' 'migration Review Tribunal']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of a Migration Review Tribunal Decision / Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellants were entitled to Sri Lankan (Temporary) (class TT) visas (subclass 435 visa).' 'Whether the Tribunal and Federal Magistrates Court correctly determined that the first and second appellants did not satisfy cl 435.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) because they did not enter Australia on or before 1 November 1993.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the first and second appellants entered Australia after 1 November 1993 and therefore did not satisfy cl 435.213 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), so the Tribunal and Federal Magistrate correctly determined that the appellants did not qualify for subclass 435 visas.

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed and the appellants must pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellants pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal."]