Applicant S291 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 250

Applicant S291 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 250

The application and supporting affidavit did not themselves disclose an arguable case for final relief or jurisdictional error, but counsel's submissions on asserted denial of procedural fairness were not hopeless and raised arguable issues. The matter should therefore be listed for directions, with the Minister able to address further conduct including the operation of Order 51A rule 5(1).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Remitted Application Under S 75(v) of the Constitution Seeking an Order Nisi in Relation to a Refugee Review Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Further Conduct and Directions After Remittal From the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Minister joined as first respondent and matter listed for directions on a date to be fixed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice' 'jurisdictional Error' 'order Nisi' 'remittal From High Court']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'constitutional Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice' 'jurisdictional Error' 'order Nisi' 'remittal From High Court']

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

Remitted Application Under S 75(v) of the Constitution Seeking an Order Nisi in Relation to a Refugee Review Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Further Conduct and Directions After Remittal From the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant had an arguable case for an order nisi arising from alleged denial of natural justice by the Refugee Review Tribunal.' 'Whether the further conduct of the remitted application should proceed to directions, including consideration of Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court Rules.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application and supporting affidavit did not themselves disclose an arguable case for final relief or jurisdictional error, but counsel's submissions on asserted denial of procedural fairness were not hopeless and raised arguable issues. The matter should therefore be listed for directions, with the Minister able to address further conduct including the operation of Order 51A rule 5(1).

Court Disposition

Minister joined as first respondent and matter listed for directions on a date to be fixed.

Orders

  • ['The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs be joined as a respondent to the proceeding as first respondent.' 'The matter be listed for directions on a date to be fixed.']