Goswami v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1017

Goswami v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1017

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants' proposed grounds raised no arguable error of law or merit, the decision under challenge was correct as the applicants did not meet the statutory requirement of being subject to an approved sponsor nomination per cl 186.223(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), and there was no denial of procedural fairness or natural justice by the Tribunal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders and Judgment of Federal Circuit Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['visa Applications' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'requirements for Sponsor Nomination']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['visa Applications' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'requirements for Sponsor Nomination']

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 / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders and Judgment of Federal Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court judgment dismissing judicial review of a Tribunal decision refusing Employer Nomination visas' 'Whether proposed grounds of appeal identified any error of law or jurisdictional error' 'Whether procedural fairness or natural justice was denied before the Tribunal']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants' proposed grounds raised no arguable error of law or merit, the decision under challenge was correct as the applicants did not meet the statutory requirement of being subject to an approved sponsor nomination per cl 186.223(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), and there was no denial of procedural fairness or natural justice by the Tribunal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.' "The first and second applicants pay the first respondent's costs, as agreed or taxed."]