ADT17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1685

ADT17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1685

The asserted citizenship of the third appellant arose after the Tribunal decision and did not provide a basis for overturning the primary judge's decision concerning the Tribunal's affirmation of the refusal of protection visas. The appellants did not identify any claim before the Tribunal that was not considered, and the Tribunal's reasons demonstrated consideration of the claims. The additional matters concerning the children's current circumstances were not advanced before the Tribunal and did not establish jurisdictional error. Accordingly, no error was shown in the primary judge's decision and the appeal had to be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of Protection Visa Applications / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; first and second appellants ordered to pay the respondent's costs fixed at $3,000.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'failure to Consider Claims' 'australian Citizenship of a Child' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visas' 'jurisdictional Error' 'failure to Consider Claims' 'australian Citizenship of a Child' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review']

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

Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Judicial Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of Protection Visa Applications / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the third appellant's asserted Australian citizenship, arising after the Tribunal decision, provided a basis to allow the appeal" "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the appellants' claims" 'Whether the primary judge erred in finding no jurisdictional error']

Ratio Decidendi

The asserted citizenship of the third appellant arose after the Tribunal decision and did not provide a basis for overturning the primary judge's decision concerning the Tribunal's affirmation of the refusal of protection visas. The appellants did not identify any claim before the Tribunal that was not considered, and the Tribunal's reasons demonstrated consideration of the claims. The additional matters concerning the children's current circumstances were not advanced before the Tribunal and did not establish jurisdictional error. Accordingly, no error was shown in the primary judge's decision and the appeal had to be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; first and second appellants ordered to pay the respondent's costs fixed at $3,000.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.' "The first and second appellants pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $3,000."]