Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 164

Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 164

Neither ground of appeal demonstrated jurisdictional error nor legal error by the Tribunal or the primary judge; the Tribunal's finding that the appellant was not willing and able to provide substantial and continuing assistance was open on the evidence; the rejection of further documents did not constitute error.

Parties
Appellant: Kuldip Kaur; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Carer Visa, Visa Criteria, Judicial Review, Tribunal Decision, Jurisdictional Error
Migration Law Administrative Law Carer Visa Visa Criteria Judicial Review Tribunal Decision Jurisdictional Error

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kuldip Kaur

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the appellant was not willing and able to provide substantial and continuing assistance as required by regulation 1.15AA(1)(f) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the rejection of material by the primary judge amounted to recognisable error
  3. 3 Whether the primary judge's findings involved jurisdictional error

Ratio Decidendi

Neither ground of appeal demonstrated jurisdictional error nor legal error by the Tribunal or the primary judge; the Tribunal's finding that the appellant was not willing and able to provide substantial and continuing assistance was open on the evidence; the rejection of further documents did not constitute error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed with costs.