Lee, Choong Kyoo v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 487

Lee, Choong Kyoo v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 487

The adjournment was refused because Mr Lee had known the hearing date for at least two months, there was no evidence establishing that travel from Rockhampton to Sydney would jeopardise his employment or impose undue financial hardship, no cogent case for adjournment was made out, and the material before the Court gave no indication of an arguable error of law in the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Hearing of Adjournment Application
Outcome
Adjournment refused.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'adjournment' 'judicial Review for Error of Law']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'adjournment' 'judicial Review for Error of Law']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Hearing of Adjournment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an adjournment of the hearing listed for 1 May 1998.' "Whether the material before the Court disclosed an arguable case that the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision involved an error of law."]

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment was refused because Mr Lee had known the hearing date for at least two months, there was no evidence establishing that travel from Rockhampton to Sydney would jeopardise his employment or impose undue financial hardship, no cogent case for adjournment was made out, and the material before the Court gave no indication of an arguable error of law in the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision.

Court Disposition

Adjournment refused.

Orders

  • ['The Court declined to grant the adjournment sought.']