DTL16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 125

DTL16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 125

Leave to raise new grounds was refused because the grounds were generic, unsupported by particulars and lacked sufficient merit. The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal considered the appellant's claims, gave him an opportunity to address credibility concerns, made credibility findings that were open on the material and not irrational or unreasonable, and dealt with the data breach claim by reference to the information disclosed and country information, revealing no jurisdictional error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Judicial Review Decision Concerning Refusal of a Temporary Protection Visa / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Application to Raise New Grounds on Appeal
Outcome
Application to raise new grounds on appeal refused; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['temporary Protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'credibility Findings' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'data Breach and Risk on Return']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['temporary Protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'credibility Findings' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'data Breach and Risk on Return']

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 Judicial Review Decision Concerning Refusal of a Temporary Protection Visa / Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Application to Raise New Grounds on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to raise grounds not advanced before the Federal Circuit Court.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the appellant's claims or integers of claims, including his claim to be a stateless Rohingya and his claimed well-founded fear of persecution." 'Whether the Tribunal denied procedural fairness or breached s 425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in reaching adverse credibility findings.' "Whether the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings were irrational, unreasonable or unsupported by evidence." "Whether the Tribunal erred in dealing with the appellant's claim that a Departmental data breach exposed him to risk of harm if returned to Bangladesh."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to raise new grounds was refused because the grounds were generic, unsupported by particulars and lacked sufficient merit. The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal considered the appellant's claims, gave him an opportunity to address credibility concerns, made credibility findings that were open on the material and not irrational or unreasonable, and dealt with the data breach claim by reference to the information disclosed and country information, revealing no jurisdictional error.

Court Disposition

Application to raise new grounds on appeal refused; appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['The application to raise new grounds on appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal."]