A28 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 869

A28 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 869

No particulars were furnished and no supporting evidence or submissions were provided; applicants having departed Australia and no case advanced, relief by way of order nisi was refused.

Parties
Applicant: A28 OF 2003; Applicant: A44 OF 2003; Applicant: A50 OF 2003; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Sue Zelinka, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal; Second Respondent: Patricia Leehy, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal; Second Respondent: J S Russell, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Prerogative Writ / Final Judgment
Outcome
application for order nisi refused
Legal Topics
Protection Visas, Refugee Review, Prerogative Writs
Migration Law Administrative Law Protection Visas Refugee Review Prerogative Writs

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A28 OF 2003

Applicant

A44 OF 2003

Applicant

A50 OF 2003

Applicant

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Sue Zelinka, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Patricia Leehy, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

J S Russell, Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Prerogative Writ / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether breach of rules of natural justice occurred
  2. 2 whether there was error of law
  3. 3 whether there was failure to observe procedures required by law

Ratio Decidendi

No particulars were furnished and no supporting evidence or submissions were provided; applicants having departed Australia and no case advanced, relief by way of order nisi was refused.

Court Disposition

application for order nisi refused

Orders

  • Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court rules does not apply
  • Application for an order nisi be refused