Singh, Baldev v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1997] FCA 472

Singh, Baldev v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1997] FCA 472

The application was dismissed because the facts were relevantly on all fours with Ozmanian. Section 485(1) of the Migration Act 1958, read with ss 475(2)(e) and 476(1), deprived the Federal Court of jurisdiction under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 and s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 to review the Ministerial officers' conduct in not referring Mr Singh's s 351 request to the Minister. The Senior Adviser was authorised to act on behalf of the Minister, and in any event the Minister's later letter showed that remittal would be futile and that Mr Singh had in substance received the relief sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 1997
Procedural Posture
Application to Review Conduct Related to the Making of a Decision Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 and Application Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 Concerning a Request for Ministerial Intervention Under S 351 of the Migration Act 1958 / Respondents' Notice of Motion to Strike Out the Application Pursuant to O 20 R 2 and O 54 B R 5 of the Federal Court Rules for Want of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['ministerial Discretion Under S 351 of the Migration Act 1958' 'judicial Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977' 'jurisdiction of the Federal Court Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903' 'summary Dismissal or Strike Out' 'immigration Detention']
['immigration' 'administrative Law' 'federal Jurisdiction'] ['ministerial Discretion Under S 351 of the Migration Act 1958' 'judicial Review Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977' 'jurisdiction of the Federal Court Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903' 'summary Dismissal or Strike Out' 'immigration Detention']

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

Application to Review Conduct Related to the Making of a Decision Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977 and Application Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 Concerning a Request for Ministerial Intervention Under S 351 of the Migration Act 1958 / Respondents' Notice of Motion to Strike Out the Application Pursuant to O 20 R 2 and O 54 B R 5 of the Federal Court Rules for Want of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Court had jurisdiction under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 or s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 to review conduct of officers of the Minister whereby Mr Singh's request for exercise of the Minister's discretion under s 351 of the Migration Act 1958 was not referred to the Minister." 'Whether the Full Court decision in Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Ozmanian (1996) 141 ALR 322 required dismissal of the application.' "Whether any lack of authority in the Senior Adviser would justify relief despite the Minister's subsequent letter dated 5 September 1995." 'Whether the Court could grant Mr Singh bail from immigration detention to enable him to obtain legal advice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the facts were relevantly on all fours with Ozmanian. Section 485(1) of the Migration Act 1958, read with ss 475(2)(e) and 476(1), deprived the Federal Court of jurisdiction under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 and s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 to review the Ministerial officers' conduct in not referring Mr Singh's s 351 request to the Minister. The Senior Adviser was authorised to act on behalf of the Minister, and in any event the Minister's later letter showed that remittal would be futile and that Mr Singh had in substance received the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceeding."]