Alam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 278
The applicant identified no substantiated error of law and no ground under section 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) upon which the Court could interfere with the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings; the Tribunal's decision therefore had to be affirmed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 March 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Concerning a Protection Visa / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Final Orders
- Outcome
- The decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal was affirmed and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['protection Visa' 'refugee Status' 'judicial Review' 'error of Law' 'credibility Findings' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 476']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Concerning a Protection Visa / Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment and Final Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal made an error of law in affirming the refusal of a protection visa.' "Whether any ground under section 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) permitted the Court to interfere with the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings."]
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant identified no substantiated error of law and no ground under section 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) upon which the Court could interfere with the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings; the Tribunal's decision therefore had to be affirmed.
Court Disposition
The decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal was affirmed and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
Orders
- ['The decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal be affirmed.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the respondent.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment