Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 562

Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 562

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds did not demonstrate any appealable error in the Federal Circuit Court's decision. The mandatory approved nomination requirement in cl 187.233 was not met, the Tribunal had informed the applicant of the issue and invited a response and hearing attendance, and the procedural fairness complaint, including lack of legal advice, did not establish jurisdictional error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Leave to Appeal From Dismissal of Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['regional Employer Nomination (permanent) (class Rn) Subclass 187 Visa' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision' 'leave to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['regional Employer Nomination (permanent) (class Rn) Subclass 187 Visa' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision' 'leave to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness']

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 Application for Leave to Appeal From Dismissal of Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court of Australia's dismissal of the applicant's judicial review application." 'Whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error in affirming refusal of the visa because the applicant did not have an approved nomination under cl 187.233 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).' 'Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness by the Department or the Tribunal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds did not demonstrate any appealable error in the Federal Circuit Court's decision. The mandatory approved nomination requirement in cl 187.233 was not met, the Tribunal had informed the applicant of the issue and invited a response and hearing attendance, and the procedural fairness complaint, including lack of legal advice, did not establish jurisdictional error.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]