AGI18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 119

AGI18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 119

None of the grounds of appeal had substance: the primary judge did consider and properly reject the adjournment application, did not deny procedural fairness, provided adequate oral and later written reasons, and there was no basis shown for apprehended bias.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adjournment Applications']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['protection Visas' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'adjournment Applications']

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

Appeal / Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary judge failed to consider an application for adjournment' 'Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness' 'Whether the primary judge failed to provide reasons for decision' 'Whether there was apprehended bias in the decision']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds of appeal had substance: the primary judge did consider and properly reject the adjournment application, did not deny procedural fairness, provided adequate oral and later written reasons, and there was no basis shown for apprehended bias.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs, as agreed or assessed."]