ENR18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1573

ENR18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1573

The appeal must be dismissed because the Tribunal’s adverse findings on credibility regarding harm in Malaysia were available on the evidence, the Tribunal did not fail to consider any claim that was fairly raised or clear from the material, and no jurisdictional error was identified. The primary judge was correct to dismiss the application for judicial review.

Parties
Appellant: ENR18; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court to Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Judicial Review, Jurisdictional Error, Statutory Interpretation
Migration Law Administrative Law Protection Visa Judicial Review Jurisdictional Error Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ENR18

Appellant

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court to Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal made a jurisdictional error in rejecting protection visa claims
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred regarding relocation and protection assessments under s.36(2)(a) and (aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether failure to consider new claims constituted a jurisdictional error

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal must be dismissed because the Tribunal’s adverse findings on credibility regarding harm in Malaysia were available on the evidence, the Tribunal did not fail to consider any claim that was fairly raised or clear from the material, and no jurisdictional error was identified. The primary judge was correct to dismiss the application for judicial review.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The name of the first respondent be amended to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs.
  • The appeal be dismissed.