Applicant S1914/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 737

Applicant S1914/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 737

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was bound to fail: the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain a further review of the same delegate's decision after an earlier Tribunal had affirmed it and no Court had invalidated that earlier Tribunal decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment of a Federal Magistrate
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'judicial Review' 'leave to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice']
['immigration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['refugee Review Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'judicial Review' 'leave to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment of a Federal Magistrate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal an interlocutory judgment dismissing an application for judicial review of a Refugee Review Tribunal decision as not raising an arguable case.' "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal had jurisdiction to review a delegate's decision where the Tribunal, differently constituted, had already affirmed the delegate's decision and no Court had invalidated the original Tribunal decision." 'Whether any issue of procedural fairness or natural justice arose where the Tribunal declined to entertain a review because it had no power to do so.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was bound to fail: the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain a further review of the same delegate's decision after an earlier Tribunal had affirmed it and no Court had invalidated that earlier Tribunal decision.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.' 'The applicant is to pay the costs of the first respondent, fixed at $2000.']