Fuad Bin Mahboob v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1996] FCA 148

Fuad Bin Mahboob v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1996] FCA 148

Because s 39 of the Migration Reform Act 1992 (as amended) evidences a clear intention to subject the review of decisions on pre–1 September 1994 applications to the new regime in its entirety—including judicial review under Part 4B—the Court does not have jurisdiction under the AD(JR) Act or s 39B of the Judiciary Act to deal with the application; the new statutory review regime applies.

Parties
Applicant: Fuad Bin Mahboob; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs; Second Respondent: Dr K Chan, constituting the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Application for Judicial Review / Reasons for Judgment Following Hearing, Determination of Jurisdictional Issue
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Formal orders deferred to allow further submissions on construction and costs.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Refugee Status Determination, Interpretation of Statutes, Transitional Provisions
Immigration Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Refugee Status Determination Interpretation of Statutes Transitional Provisions

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fuad Bin Mahboob

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs

First Respondent

Dr K Chan, constituting the Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Application for Judicial Review / Reasons for Judgment Following Hearing, Determination of Jurisdictional Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to review the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 given legislative amendments
  2. 2 Whether an applicant who applied prior to the commencement of new statutory regime has an accrued right to have application determined under previous law
  3. 3 Whether the new judicial review regime applies to applications made before its commencement

Ratio Decidendi

Because s 39 of the Migration Reform Act 1992 (as amended) evidences a clear intention to subject the review of decisions on pre–1 September 1994 applications to the new regime in its entirety—including judicial review under Part 4B—the Court does not have jurisdiction under the AD(JR) Act or s 39B of the Judiciary Act to deal with the application; the new statutory review regime applies.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Formal orders deferred to allow further submissions on construction and costs.