Sarkar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1254

Sarkar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1254

The Tribunal considered the evidence put before it in the waiver application, including the employer's support letter, and relevant submissions for waiver under PIC 4020. The financial contributions cited by the applicant were not raised before the Tribunal as relevant to waiver, nor were they obviously relevant to the statutory criteria. No jurisdictional error is demonstrated, and the proposed grounds of appeal have no reasonable prospects of success.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'migration – Student Visa Refusal' 'waiver of PIC 4020 – Bogus Documents' 'jurisdictional Error']
['administrative Law' 'immigration Law'] ['judicial Review' 'migration – Student Visa Refusal' 'waiver of PIC 4020 – Bogus Documents' 'jurisdictional Error']

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 / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant matters in its waiver decision under PIC 4020' 'Whether the Tribunal committed a jurisdictional error by not considering all relevant evidence' 'Whether leave to raise new grounds for appeal should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal considered the evidence put before it in the waiver application, including the employer's support letter, and relevant submissions for waiver under PIC 4020. The financial contributions cited by the applicant were not raised before the Tribunal as relevant to waiver, nor were they obviously relevant to the statutory criteria. No jurisdictional error is demonstrated, and the proposed grounds of appeal have no reasonable prospects of success.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal from the orders made by the Federal Circuit Court on 1 February 2018 is refused.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]