ALS17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1858

ALS17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1858

Leave to raise the fresh bias ground was refused because the allegation was unparticularised, unsupported by evidence, unexplained as to why it was not raised below, and of doubtful merit. The remaining grounds failed because the Tribunal's credibility findings and conclusions were open on the materials, reflected a logical chain of reasoning from the evidence and identified inconsistencies, and the appellant showed no irrelevant questions, irrelevant considerations, constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction, jurisdictional error, or appealable error by the Federal Circuit Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Protection Visa Refusal / Appeal to the Federal Court; Leave Required to Raise a Fresh Ground of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'leave to Raise Fresh Grounds of Appeal' 'bias' 'jurisdictional Error' 'credibility Findings' 'irrelevant Questions or Considerations' 'merits Review']
['migration' 'administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'leave to Raise Fresh Grounds of Appeal' 'bias' 'jurisdictional Error' 'credibility Findings' 'irrelevant Questions or Considerations' 'merits Review']

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

Migration Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Protection Visa Refusal / Appeal to the Federal Court; Leave Required to Raise a Fresh Ground of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant should be granted leave to raise for the first time on appeal a ground alleging bias by the Tribunal.' "Whether the Tribunal refused the appellant's claims without substantiated evidence or constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction by reasoning irrationally or illogically." 'Whether questions put to the appellant were irrelevant or showed that the Tribunal took into account irrelevant considerations.' "Whether there was jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision or appealable error in the Federal Circuit Court decision."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to raise the fresh bias ground was refused because the allegation was unparticularised, unsupported by evidence, unexplained as to why it was not raised below, and of doubtful merit. The remaining grounds failed because the Tribunal's credibility findings and conclusions were open on the materials, reflected a logical chain of reasoning from the evidence and identified inconsistencies, and the appellant showed no irrelevant questions, irrelevant considerations, constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction, jurisdictional error, or appealable error by the Federal Circuit Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The Appellant pay the First Respondent's costs."]