Golovcenco v Centrelink [2003] FCA 527

Golovcenco v Centrelink [2003] FCA 527

The applicant was not entitled to Newstart allowance because he did not satisfy the Australian residence requirements in the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), holding only a temporary bridging visa E (sub-class 050). The Refugees Convention did not assist him because he did not hold and was not entitled to a protection visa, and the Stateless Persons Convention had not been incorporated into Australian domestic law and therefore created no personally enforceable right to social security benefits. No ambiguity in the legislation allowed Teoh to operate in his favour, and the Australia-Austria social security agreement did not apply to Newstart allowance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for an Order of Review of a Decision Refusing Social Security Benefits / Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['eligibility for Newstart Allowance' 'australian Residence Requirements' 'bridging Visa Holder Eligibility' 'refugees Convention' 'stateless Persons Convention' 'domestic Effect of Unincorporated Treaties']
['social Security' 'migration' 'administrative Law' 'international Law'] ['eligibility for Newstart Allowance' 'australian Residence Requirements' 'bridging Visa Holder Eligibility' 'refugees Convention' 'stateless Persons Convention' 'domestic Effect of Unincorporated Treaties']

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 an Order of Review of a Decision Refusing Social Security Benefits / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant was eligible for Newstart allowance under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth).' 'Whether Article 24 of the Refugees Convention or the Stateless Persons Convention gave the applicant a personally enforceable entitlement to social security benefits.' 'Whether the Stateless Persons Convention, not incorporated into Australian domestic law, created enforceable rights or obligations in Australia.' 'Whether the Agreement between Australia and the Republic of Austria on Social Security conferred any entitlement to the benefit sought.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was not entitled to Newstart allowance because he did not satisfy the Australian residence requirements in the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), holding only a temporary bridging visa E (sub-class 050). The Refugees Convention did not assist him because he did not hold and was not entitled to a protection visa, and the Stateless Persons Convention had not been incorporated into Australian domestic law and therefore created no personally enforceable right to social security benefits. No ambiguity in the legislation allowed Teoh to operate in his favour, and the Australia-Austria social security agreement did not apply to Newstart allowance.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the application, including reserved costs, to be taxed if not agreed."]