EUW17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 744

EUW17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 744

The appeal failed because the IAA's Practice Direction was a publicly available and generally applicable part of the routine procedural context for the review, not an event altering that context in the sense discussed in SZMTA. The IAA was not obliged to specifically notify the appellant of the Practice Direction, and the appellant in any event received it well before the IAA made its decision, so he was not deprived of an opportunity to make submissions and no practical injustice occurred. Further, s 473DA exhaustively stated the natural justice hearing rule for IAA reviews and excluded the asserted common law procedural fairness obligation. Any failure to consider the correct address as...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Decision of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'fast Track Reviewable Decision' 'immigration Assessment Authority' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice Hearing Rule' 'jurisdictional Error' 'practice Direction' 'materiality']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'fast Track Reviewable Decision' 'immigration Assessment Authority' 'procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice Hearing Rule' 'jurisdictional Error' 'practice Direction' 'materiality']

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 Decision of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness because the Immigration Assessment Authority sent the acknowledgement of referral and Practice Direction to the wrong address.' 'Whether any failure to send the acknowledgement of referral and Practice Direction to the correct address was jurisdictional error.' 'Whether s 473DA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) excluded any relevant common law procedural fairness obligation in the IAA review.' 'Whether the IAA failed to conduct the review in accordance with Part 7AA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), including ss 473DB, 473HA or 473HB.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the IAA's Practice Direction was a publicly available and generally applicable part of the routine procedural context for the review, not an event altering that context in the sense discussed in SZMTA. The IAA was not obliged to specifically notify the appellant of the Practice Direction, and the appellant in any event received it well before the IAA made its decision, so he was not deprived of an opportunity to make submissions and no practical injustice occurred. Further, s 473DA exhaustively stated the natural justice hearing rule for IAA reviews and excluded the asserted common law procedural fairness obligation. Any failure to consider the correct address as...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs, to be assessed if not agreed."]