ABP16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1419

ABP16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1419

The grounds of appeal did not identify any appealable error; they either repeated the claimant's protection claims, challenged the merits, or inadequately alleged bias and misapplication of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal properly considered s 91R and there was no error or bias. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: ABP16; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Visas, Judicial Review, Jurisdictional Error, Bias, Section 91 R Migration Act
Migration Law Administrative Law Protection Visas Judicial Review Jurisdictional Error Bias Section 91 R Migration Act

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABP16

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary judge erred in failing to find error in the Tribunal's application of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the grounds of appeal identified any appealable error
  3. 3 Whether there was bias in the Tribunal proceedings against the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of appeal did not identify any appealable error; they either repeated the claimant's protection claims, challenged the merits, or inadequately alleged bias and misapplication of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal properly considered s 91R and there was no error or bias. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appellant's notice of appeal filed 5 April 2017 is dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of this appeal to be taxed failing agreement.