Ogawa v Carter [2020] FCA 828

Ogawa v Carter [2020] FCA 828

The Court dismissed the application because Ms Carter was validly subdelegated the power under s 63(1)(b), she took into account Dr Ogawa's ability to repay when setting the instalment conditions, and her reasons supplied an evident and intelligible justification for the $2,000 monthly instalment decision, so no jurisdictional error was demonstrated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) Seeking a Writ of Certiorari Quashing a Decision Approving a Commonwealth Debt Payment Plan and Other Relief / Final Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The originating application was dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['certiorari' 'delegation and Subdelegation' 'relevant Considerations' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'commonwealth Debt Payment Plan' 'public Interest Criterion 4004']
['administrative Law' 'public Governance' 'migration'] ['certiorari' 'delegation and Subdelegation' 'relevant Considerations' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'commonwealth Debt Payment Plan' 'public Interest Criterion 4004']

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 Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) Seeking a Writ of Certiorari Quashing a Decision Approving a Commonwealth Debt Payment Plan and Other Relief / Final Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Ms Carter had authority to make the decision under s 63(1)(b) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (Cth)' "Whether Ms Carter failed to have regard to Dr Ogawa's ability to repay the debt" 'Whether the decision requiring monthly instalments of $2,000 was legally unreasonable']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the application because Ms Carter was validly subdelegated the power under s 63(1)(b), she took into account Dr Ogawa's ability to repay when setting the instalment conditions, and her reasons supplied an evident and intelligible justification for the $2,000 monthly instalment decision, so no jurisdictional error was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

The originating application was dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The originating application is dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the application."]