FBR18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1620

FBR18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1620

Leave to appeal and leave to raise new grounds was refused because none of the proposed new grounds demonstrated sufficient merit or exceptional circumstances to warrant consideration for the first time on appeal, given that all relevant statutory criteria and authorities favoured strict application of the legislative scheme, and the applicant was afforded opportunities to present his case below.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal and Application to Raise New Grounds
Outcome
Application dismissed. Leave to appeal and leave to raise new grounds refused.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'federal Court Procedure' 'migration Act Fast Track Review' 'immigration Assessment Authority (iaa) Process']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'federal Court Procedure' 'migration Act Fast Track Review' 'immigration Assessment Authority (iaa) Process']

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 Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal and Application to Raise New Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal from FCCA decision should be granted' 'Whether leave to rely on new grounds not raised below should be granted' 'Whether IAA failed to exercise or consider relevant statutory discretion under s 473DC Migration Act' 'Whether IAA erred in not considering or properly considering new information under s 473DD Migration Act' 'Obligation to consider claims cumulatively']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal and leave to raise new grounds was refused because none of the proposed new grounds demonstrated sufficient merit or exceptional circumstances to warrant consideration for the first time on appeal, given that all relevant statutory criteria and authorities favoured strict application of the legislative scheme, and the applicant was afforded opportunities to present his case below.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. Leave to appeal and leave to raise new grounds refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to raise the proposed four new grounds on appeal is refused.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The application is dismissed.' "The applicant must pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]