CVRZ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCAFC 205

CVRZ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCAFC 205

Leave to raise the three new appeal grounds was refused because there was no adequate explanation for failing to raise them before the primary judge and the proposed grounds lacked sufficient merit. On the Omar ground, the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, showed that it understood and considered the appellant's claimed human consequences and risk of harm in Zimbabwe independently of non-refoulement obligations. On the no evidence ground, the Tribunal did not find that any particular level of economic support existed, but only that the appellant would have access to support generally available to Zimbabwean citizens. On the unreasonableness ground, the challenged findings about...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Non Revocation of Mandatory Visa Cancellation / Appeal to the Full Court; Application for Leave to Raise New Grounds
Outcome
Leave to raise grounds 1, 2 and 3 of the further amended notice of appeal refused; appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['mandatory Visa Cancellation' 'revocation Under S 501 Ca(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'character Test' 'international Non Refoulement Obligations' 'constructive Failure to Exercise Jurisdiction' 'no Evidence Ground' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['mandatory Visa Cancellation' 'revocation Under S 501 Ca(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'character Test' 'international Non Refoulement Obligations' 'constructive Failure to Exercise Jurisdiction' 'no Evidence Ground' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']

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

Migration Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Non Revocation of Mandatory Visa Cancellation / Appeal to the Full Court; Application for Leave to Raise New Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to raise three new grounds not advanced before the primary judge.' "Whether the Tribunal constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction by failing to consider the appellant's claimed risk of harm in Zimbabwe independently of Australia's non-refoulement obligations." 'Whether the Tribunal made a material finding unsupported by probative evidence about access to social, medical and/or economic support in Zimbabwe.' "Whether the Tribunal's decision was legally unreasonable, illogical or irrational in its treatment of healthcare, economic support and employment prospects in Zimbabwe."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to raise the three new appeal grounds was refused because there was no adequate explanation for failing to raise them before the primary judge and the proposed grounds lacked sufficient merit. On the Omar ground, the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, showed that it understood and considered the appellant's claimed human consequences and risk of harm in Zimbabwe independently of non-refoulement obligations. On the no evidence ground, the Tribunal did not find that any particular level of economic support existed, but only that the appellant would have access to support generally available to Zimbabwean citizens. On the unreasonableness ground, the challenged findings about...

Court Disposition

Leave to raise grounds 1, 2 and 3 of the further amended notice of appeal refused; appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave to raise grounds 1, 2 and 3 of the further amended notice of appeal be refused.' 'The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed."]