Bhuiyan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1800

Bhuiyan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1800

There was sufficient material before the Tribunal to support its findings regarding the applicant's lack of credibility and the falsity of documents produced. No reviewable error of law was made by the Tribunal in failing to investigate the documents, nor was there a ground of review under s 476 made out by the applicant. Section 420 does not confer an independent ground of review.

Parties
Applicant: Bhuiyan; Respondent: Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Judicial Review, Credibility of Evidence, Refugee Status, Grounds of Review, Procedural Fairness
Migration Law Administrative Law Protection Visa Judicial Review Credibility of Evidence Refugee Status Grounds of Review Procedural Fairness

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bhuiyan

Applicant

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred in finding the applicant not credible
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to investigate documents produced by the applicant
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal's decision was made in accordance with the Migration Act and the Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient material before the Tribunal to support its findings regarding the applicant's lack of credibility and the falsity of documents produced. No reviewable error of law was made by the Tribunal in failing to investigate the documents, nor was there a ground of review under s 476 made out by the applicant. Section 420 does not confer an independent ground of review.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • The application is refused.
  • The applicant to pay the respondent's costs.