Applicant S227/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 983

Applicant S227/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 983

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable case that the Refugee Review Tribunal breached rules of natural justice, statutory procedure, or was affected by jurisdictional error; the alleged grounds lacked evidence, particularisation, or did not apply to the Tribunal's merits review decision; accordingly, the application was dismissed with costs.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant S227/2003; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: Dinoo Kelleghan Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Order Nisi (judicial Review) / Final Judgment on Remittal From the High Court
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Administrative Decision, Procedural Fairness, Merits Review, Refugee Status Determination
Administrative Law Migration Law Judicial Review of Administrative Decision Procedural Fairness Merits Review Refugee Status Determination

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant S227/2003

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Dinoo Kelleghan Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Order Nisi (judicial Review) / Final Judgment on Remittal From the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal breached the rules of natural justice.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal breached specific provisions of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
  3. 3 Whether allegations of bias against the Tribunal member were made out.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable case that the Refugee Review Tribunal breached rules of natural justice, statutory procedure, or was affected by jurisdictional error; the alleged grounds lacked evidence, particularisation, or did not apply to the Tribunal's merits review decision; accordingly, the application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the first respondent's costs in the amount of $2,200.