BVE16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 922
Information relevant only to credibility, such as the appellant's daughters' evidence and the Google Maps photo, does not constitute 'information' under s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth); therefore, the Tribunal was not required to provide particulars or invite a response under that provision. The Tribunal properly adjourned the hearing, so the obligation for a fresh s 425A notice did not arise. All grounds of appeal failed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 June 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['procedural Fairness' 'judicial Review' 'protection Visas' 'tribunal Procedure' 'statutory Interpretation']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Tribunal denied procedural fairness to the appellant under ss 424A and 425A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' "Whether information relevant only to credibility constitutes 'information' within the meaning of s 424A" "Whether the Tribunal's adjournment required a fresh notification under s 425A"]
Ratio Decidendi
Information relevant only to credibility, such as the appellant's daughters' evidence and the Google Maps photo, does not constitute 'information' under s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth); therefore, the Tribunal was not required to provide particulars or invite a response under that provision. The Tribunal properly adjourned the hearing, so the obligation for a fresh s 425A notice did not arise. All grounds of appeal failed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment