ANY16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 265

ANY16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 265

Leave to raise the three new grounds was refused because the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, did not show that it treated a family member guarantor as required in all circumstances; the appellant had not raised before the delegate or Tribunal any inability to obtain a family member guarantor and had evidence of ongoing contact with his wife; and there was no breach of s 425 because the consequences of return after illegal departure, including possible family assistance and a fine, had been drawn to his attention. The appellant therefore did not show error by the Federal Circuit Court or jurisdictional error by the Tribunal, and the appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Appeal; Application for Leave to Rely on Further Grounds
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to raise the three proposed new grounds of appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 425' 'sri Lanka Returnees' 'complementary Protection']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 425' 'sri Lanka Returnees' 'complementary Protection']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Appeal; Application for Leave to Rely on Further Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal proceeded on the basis that a family member guarantor would necessarily be required for the appellant to be released from detention after return to Sri Lanka' "Whether the Tribunal's reasoning was legally unreasonable because it assumed the availability of a family member guarantor without evidence" "Whether the Federal Circuit Court failed to address the Tribunal's alleged failure to consider whether the appellant had a family member who would stand as guarantor" 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in not addressing an asserted failure by the Tribunal to comply with s 425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to raise the three new grounds was refused because the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, did not show that it treated a family member guarantor as required in all circumstances; the appellant had not raised before the delegate or Tribunal any inability to obtain a family member guarantor and had evidence of ongoing contact with his wife; and there was no breach of s 425 because the consequences of return after illegal departure, including possible family assistance and a fine, had been drawn to his attention. The appellant therefore did not show error by the Federal Circuit Court or jurisdictional error by the Tribunal, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to raise the three proposed new grounds of appeal refused.

Orders

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