BRF19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 820

BRF19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 820

Leave to rely on new grounds of appeal (Grounds 1 and 2) was refused. The grounds were not raised before the primary judge and no acceptable explanation for this omission was provided. The new grounds lacked sufficient merit, and it was not expedient in the interests of justice to re-open them. The Tribunal’s findings and reasoning were open on the evidence, not contradictory, nor unreasonable or illogical. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Challenging Dismissal of Judicial Review Application Regarding a Protection Visa Refusal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on new grounds refused; costs ordered against the appellant.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'judicial Review' 'new Grounds of Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'judicial Review' 'new Grounds of Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness']

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 / Judgment on Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Challenging Dismissal of Judicial Review Application Regarding a Protection Visa Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to raise new grounds on appeal not raised below' 'Whether the Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction in accordance with s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' 'Whether Tribunal made inconsistent findings' 'Whether Tribunal failed to assess clearly articulated claims' "Whether Tribunal properly applied the 'real chance' test for serious harm" 'Whether Tribunal decision was unreasonable, illogical or irrational due to lack of evident and intelligible justification']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to rely on new grounds of appeal (Grounds 1 and 2) was refused. The grounds were not raised before the primary judge and no acceptable explanation for this omission was provided. The new grounds lacked sufficient merit, and it was not expedient in the interests of justice to re-open them. The Tribunal’s findings and reasoning were open on the evidence, not contradictory, nor unreasonable or illogical. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on new grounds refused; costs ordered against the appellant.

Orders

  • ['The appellant be refused leave to rely upon Grounds 1 and 2 of the notice of appeal.' 'The notice of appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or taxed."]