BIA16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 95

BIA16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 95

Having examined the Tribunal's reasons and the primary judge's reasons, the Court was unable to discern any jurisdictional error warranting curial intervention or any appealable error in the primary judge's reasoning. The Federal Circuit Court's judgment did not give rise to sufficient doubt warranting intervention, so leave to appeal was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From an Order of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'federal Circuit Court Dismissal Under R 44.12(1)(a)' 'sri Lanka Failed Asylum Seeker Claims']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'leave to Appeal' 'federal Circuit Court Dismissal Under R 44.12(1)(a)' 'sri Lanka Failed Asylum Seeker Claims']

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 for Leave to Appeal From an Order of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review of a Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection (class Xa) Visa / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether sufficient doubt attended the correctness of the Federal Circuit Court's judgment to warrant review" 'Whether substantial injustice would be suffered by the applicant if leave to appeal were refused' "Whether the Tribunal's decision was affected by jurisdictional error" 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court made appealable error in dismissing the judicial review application']

Ratio Decidendi

Having examined the Tribunal's reasons and the primary judge's reasons, the Court was unable to discern any jurisdictional error warranting curial intervention or any appealable error in the primary judge's reasoning. The Federal Circuit Court's judgment did not give rise to sufficient doubt warranting intervention, so leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for leave to appeal be refused." "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]