Kaur v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1834

Kaur v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1834

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants did not show that the primary judge's decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration. The primary judge correctly stated and applied the principles concerning reinstatement, permissibly considered the lack of merit in the judicial review application, and the proposed grounds and oral submissions did not identify any error by the primary judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Reinstatement of a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Federal Court; Notice of Appeal Treated as Application for Leave to Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
The notice of appeal was treated as an application for leave to appeal; the application for leave to appeal was dismissed; the applicants were ordered to pay the first respondent's costs to be fixed by lump sum.
Legal Topics
['student Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'application for Reinstatement' 'leave to Appeal' 'genuine Temporary Entrant Criterion' 'certificate of Enrolment']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['student Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'application for Reinstatement' 'leave to Appeal' 'genuine Temporary Entrant Criterion' 'certificate of Enrolment']

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 Leave to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Reinstatement of a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Federal Court; Notice of Appeal Treated as Application for Leave to Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the notice of appeal should be treated as an application for leave to appeal because the Federal Circuit Court orders were interlocutory' 'Whether the decision dismissing the application for reinstatement was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration on appeal' "Whether the applicants identified any error in the primary judge's treatment of the alleged jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants did not show that the primary judge's decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration. The primary judge correctly stated and applied the principles concerning reinstatement, permissibly considered the lack of merit in the judicial review application, and the proposed grounds and oral submissions did not identify any error by the primary judge.

Court Disposition

The notice of appeal was treated as an application for leave to appeal; the application for leave to appeal was dismissed; the applicants were ordered to pay the first respondent's costs to be fixed by lump sum.

Orders

  • ['The notice of appeal be treated as if it were an application for leave to appeal from the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.' 'The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the first respondent's costs of the proceeding in this Court, to be fixed by way of a lump sum."...