AYW16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCA 277

AYW16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCA 277

The appeal failed because the appellant identified no appellable error in the FCCA judgment and no meritorious jurisdictional error in the AAT decision. His proposed new ground was unparticularised and, in substance, sought merits review of the AAT's rejection of his narrative, which could not found jurisdictional error. Leave to advance the new ground was refused and the appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'relevant Considerations' 'irrelevant Considerations' 'leave to Raise New Ground on Appeal' 'complementary Protection']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'relevant Considerations' 'irrelevant Considerations' 'leave to Raise New Ground on Appeal' 'complementary Protection']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Concerning Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Protection Visa Decision / Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Federal Circuit Court of Australia erred by taking into account irrelevant considerations or failing to take into account relevant considerations.' 'Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision was affected by jurisdictional error by taking into account irrelevant considerations or failing to take into account relevant considerations.' 'Whether leave should be granted to advance on appeal a ground not advanced before the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the appellant identified no appellable error in the FCCA judgment and no meritorious jurisdictional error in the AAT decision. His proposed new ground was unparticularised and, in substance, sought merits review of the AAT's rejection of his narrative, which could not found jurisdictional error. Leave to advance the new ground was refused and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal, to be assessed in default of agreement in accordance with the court's Costs Practice Note (GPN-COSTS)."]