Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Lam [2003] HCA 6

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Lam [2003] HCA 6

The failure by the Department to contact the children's carer, as initially indicated, and without informing the applicant, did not result in procedural unfairness or a denial of natural justice. The applicant was afforded the opportunity to submit all relevant material, did not rely to his disadvantage on the representation, and lost no opportunity to advance his case. Legitimate expectation does not supplant procedural fairness, and only practical injustice warrants intervention; none was demonstrated. The application should be dismissed with costs.

Parties
Applicant/prosecutor: Hieu Trung Lam; Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Orders of Certiorari and Prohibition / Final Judgment, Full Court
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Natural Justice, Legitimate Expectation, Visa Cancellation, Character Test
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Migration Law Procedural Fairness Natural Justice Legitimate Expectation Visa Cancellation Character Test

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hieu Trung Lam

Applicant/prosecutor

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders of Certiorari and Prohibition / Final Judgment, Full Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness when the Department failed to contact the children's carer as indicated.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had a legitimate expectation based on the Department's representation to contact the children's carers.
  3. 3 Whether failure to meet procedural representations without notification gives rise to jurisdictional error warranting certiorari or prohibition.

Ratio Decidendi

The failure by the Department to contact the children's carer, as initially indicated, and without informing the applicant, did not result in procedural unfairness or a denial of natural justice. The applicant was afforded the opportunity to submit all relevant material, did not rely to his disadvantage on the representation, and lost no opportunity to advance his case. Legitimate expectation does not supplant procedural fairness, and only practical injustice warrants intervention; none was demonstrated. The application should be dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs.