Chi Cong Le v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 178

Chi Cong Le v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 178

The phrase 'related to your partner by blood' in the visa application forms bears its ordinary meaning, which includes first cousins. Therefore, the appellant's answers stating he was not related by blood were incorrect, engaging the cancellation provisions of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 101, 107, 108, and 109. The Tribunal's failure to provide documents covered by an invalid s 375A certificate did not constitute jurisdictional error, as those documents were not relied upon and could not have reasonably affected the outcome.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Judicial Review Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['visa Cancellation' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'interpretation of Application Form Questions']
['migration'] ['visa Cancellation' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'interpretation of Application Form Questions']

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 Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Judicial Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant's answers to the relationship question in visa application forms were incorrect and engaged cancellation provisions under Migration Act" 'Whether failure by Tribunal to provide documents covered by an invalid s 375A certificate constituted jurisdictional error and denial of procedural fairness']

Ratio Decidendi

The phrase 'related to your partner by blood' in the visa application forms bears its ordinary meaning, which includes first cousins. Therefore, the appellant's answers stating he was not related by blood were incorrect, engaging the cancellation provisions of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 101, 107, 108, and 109. The Tribunal's failure to provide documents covered by an invalid s 375A certificate did not constitute jurisdictional error, as those documents were not relied upon and could not have reasonably affected the outcome.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]