Sharma v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2024] FCA 772

Sharma v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2024] FCA 772

Leave to rely on both new grounds was refused because each lacked merit. Ground 1 was untenable because there was no evidentiary basis to infer that any delay in providing the redacted departmental file prevented the appellant from making submissions or providing relevant material in response to the Tribunal's invitation, and no evidence explaining why no further extension or further response was sought after receipt of the redacted file. Ground 2 was devoid of merit because the Auburn address was the only address communicated to the Minister in accordance with s 52(3A), no change was communicated under s 52(3B), and it was open to the Minister to infer that the appellant lived at the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Judgment Dismissing Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Visa Cancellation / Appeal; Application for Leave to Rely on New Grounds of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on grounds 1 and 2 refused.
Legal Topics
['visa Cancellation' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'access to Tribunal Material' 'notice of Non Compliance' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['visa Cancellation' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'access to Tribunal Material' 'notice of Non Compliance' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']

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

Migration Appeal From Judgment Dismissing Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Visa Cancellation / Appeal; Application for Leave to Rely on New Grounds of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellants should be permitted to rely on grounds of appeal raising arguments not raised before the primary judge.' 'Whether the Tribunal denied the first appellant a fair hearing in material breach of ss 362A and 360 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' "Whether the power to cancel the first appellant's visa under s 109 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) arose or was exercised reasonably where the appellant contended he had not been given a notice about the non-compliance." "Whether the 12 August 2016 notice was sent to the appellant's last residential address known to the Minister for the purposes of reg 2.55(3)(c) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to rely on both new grounds was refused because each lacked merit. Ground 1 was untenable because there was no evidentiary basis to infer that any delay in providing the redacted departmental file prevented the appellant from making submissions or providing relevant material in response to the Tribunal's invitation, and no evidence explaining why no further extension or further response was sought after receipt of the redacted file. Ground 2 was devoid of merit because the Auburn address was the only address communicated to the Minister in accordance with s 52(3A), no change was communicated under s 52(3B), and it was open to the Minister to infer that the appellant lived at the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on grounds 1 and 2 refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The first and second appellants pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal as taxed or agreed."]