AQP15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) [2018] FCA 1103

AQP15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) [2018] FCA 1103

Section 425 did not require the Tribunal to invite submissions specifically on the issue of the appellant's ability to provide a family member as surety for bail in Sri Lanka, as the appellant had accepted he would be released on bail, making the existence of a guarantor not an issue 'arising in relation to the decision under review.'

Parties
Appellant: AQP15; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Federal Court Determination of Appeal From Federal Circuit Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Protection Visa, Procedural Fairness, Section 425 of the Migration Act 1958
Migration Law Judicial Review Protection Visa Procedural Fairness Section 425 of the Migration Act 1958

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AQP15

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Federal Court Determination of Appeal From Federal Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s 425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by failing to give the appellant the opportunity to present information and arguments concerning whether a family member would act as surety to enable him to be bailed in the event of detention for illegally departing Sri Lanka
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal's reasoning assumed as dispositive the provision of a family member as surety for bail

Ratio Decidendi

Section 425 did not require the Tribunal to invite submissions specifically on the issue of the appellant's ability to provide a family member as surety for bail in Sri Lanka, as the appellant had accepted he would be released on bail, making the existence of a guarantor not an issue 'arising in relation to the decision under review.'

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs.