SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionSZTGM v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionCitation:[2017] HCA 34Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:06 Sep 2017Case Number:S272/2016, S273/2016Read more

SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionSZTGM v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionCitation:[2017] HCA 34Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:06 Sep 2017Case Number:S272/2016, S273/2016Read more

The Court held that the statutory definitions of 'cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment' and 'degrading treatment or punishment' require intentional infliction or intention to cause the relevant harm, and that knowledge or foresight of the result is insufficient to satisfy the requirement of intention.

Parties
Applicant: Appellants; Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Complementary Protection, Cruel or Inhuman Treatment, Degrading Treatment, Intention in Criminal Law
Migration Law Human Rights Law Protection Visa Complementary Protection Cruel or Inhuman Treatment Degrading Treatment Intention in Criminal Law

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellants

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the definition of 'cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment' in s 5(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) requires intentional infliction of pain or suffering
  2. 2 Whether the definition of 'degrading treatment or punishment' in s 5(1) of the Migration Act requires intention to cause extreme humiliation
  3. 3 Whether intention can be established by knowledge or foresight of pain, suffering, or extreme humiliation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the statutory definitions of 'cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment' and 'degrading treatment or punishment' require intentional infliction or intention to cause the relevant harm, and that knowledge or foresight of the result is insufficient to satisfy the requirement of intention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed.