Dang v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1484

Dang v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1484

The applicant's detention following parole was authorised by s 254 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), which by operation of s 254(3) incorporates s 253(2) and (8) for the purposes of detention after notice is given under s 254(2); therefore, the detention was lawful and the grounds for review were not made out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['immigration Detention' 'deportation' 'statutory Interpretation' 'extension of Time']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['immigration Detention' 'deportation' 'statutory Interpretation' 'extension of Time']

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

Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Lawfulness of detention of deportee following term of custody by State authority' 'Interaction of ss 253 and 254 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' 'Whether detention was effected under s 253 or s 254' 'Whether there is power to detain after giving notice under s 254(2)']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's detention following parole was authorised by s 254 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), which by operation of s 254(3) incorporates s 253(2) and (8) for the purposes of detention after notice is given under s 254(2); therefore, the detention was lawful and the grounds for review were not made out.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The time allowed for lodging the application for an order of review under s 5 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) is extended to 25 August 1998.' 'The application is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay two thirds of the first respondent's costs of the application including reserved...