APD15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 407

APD15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 407

The assessing officer applied the correct legal test for non-refoulement, correctly examined both the risk posed specifically by the data breach and whether the applicant fell within a category requiring international protection, and did not make a legal error, so no substantial injustice arises warranting interlocutory relief or leave to appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Interlocutory Injunction / Application Determined at Interlocutory/appellate Stage in Federal Court
Outcome
Application for injunction and leave to appeal dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicant.
Legal Topics
['non Refoulement' 'procedure—interlocutory Relief' 'international Treaties Obligation Assessment' 'data Breach and Sur Place Claims' 'risk of Serious Harm—return to Sri Lanka']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'human Rights'] ['non Refoulement' 'procedure—interlocutory Relief' 'international Treaties Obligation Assessment' 'data Breach and Sur Place Claims' 'risk of Serious Harm—return to Sri Lanka']

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 and Interlocutory Injunction / Application Determined at Interlocutory/appellate Stage in Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the assessing officer asked the correct question regarding non-refoulement obligations in light of the data breach' "Whether the assessor properly considered the applicant's risk of serious or significant harm consequent to the data breach" 'Whether interlocutory injunctive relief is appropriate' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The assessing officer applied the correct legal test for non-refoulement, correctly examined both the risk posed specifically by the data breach and whether the applicant fell within a category requiring international protection, and did not make a legal error, so no substantial injustice arises warranting interlocutory relief or leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for injunction and leave to appeal dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • ["The application for an injunction to restrain the Applicant's removal from Australia this afternoon is dismissed." 'The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.' "The Applicant is to pay the First Respondent's costs of the application, in the sum of $2200."]