EQV20 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1252

EQV20 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 1252

The reference in the Tribunal's reasons to two common assault convictions on 26 August 2019 was a clerical or typographical error: in context the Tribunal intended to write 2010, did not misapprehend the evidence, and the factual basis for the alleged jurisdictional errors was not made out. The judicial review application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Under S 501 Ca(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (cth) Not to Revoke a Visa Cancellation Decision Under S 501(3 A) / Original Jurisdiction Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['visa Cancellation' 'revocation of Mandatory Cancellation' 'jurisdictional Error' 'typographical or Clerical Error in Reasons' 'procedural Fairness' 'irrelevant Consideration' 'unreasonableness' 'direction No 79' 'domestic Violence Offending']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['visa Cancellation' 'revocation of Mandatory Cancellation' 'jurisdictional Error' 'typographical or Clerical Error in Reasons' 'procedural Fairness' 'irrelevant Consideration' 'unreasonableness' 'direction No 79' 'domestic Violence Offending']

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

Application for Judicial Review of an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Under S 501 Ca(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (cth) Not to Revoke a Visa Cancellation Decision Under S 501(3 A) / Original Jurisdiction Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error by referring at [43] to two common assault convictions as occurring on 26 August 2019 when the convictions were in fact entered on 26 August 2010.' 'Whether the incorrect date was a clerical or typographical error rather than a misapprehension of the evidence.' 'Whether the Tribunal took into account an irrelevant consideration, constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction, acted unreasonably, or denied procedural fairness in reaching satisfaction that there was no other reason to revoke the cancellation under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii).']

Ratio Decidendi

The reference in the Tribunal's reasons to two common assault convictions on 26 August 2019 was a clerical or typographical error: in context the Tribunal intended to write 2010, did not misapprehend the evidence, and the factual basis for the alleged jurisdictional errors was not made out. The judicial review application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed with costs.']