Prasad v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 286

Prasad v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 286

The 6 September 1999 refusal to reopen the 1988 GORS refusal was not a judicially reviewable decision under s 475(1)(c) because no statutory or regulatory provision authorised the reconsideration process, the Minister had not accepted that the 1988 decisions were void, and the refusal to reopen was at least one step removed from a decision relating to visas. Even if it were reviewable, the Convention on the Rights of the Child ground and the s 476(1)(d) policy ground were misconceived because the Department was not deciding whether to grant visas and was entitled to decline to reopen a decision made more than ten years earlier.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Migration Decision / Federal Court Judgment on Application for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['grant of Residence Status Application' 'judicial Review Under Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'reviewable Decision' 'reconsideration of Refused Entry Permit Application' 'convention on the Rights of the Child' 'policy and Discretionary Power']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['grant of Residence Status Application' 'judicial Review Under Migration Act 1958 (cth)' 'reviewable Decision' 'reconsideration of Refused Entry Permit Application' 'convention on the Rights of the Child' 'policy and Discretionary Power']

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 for Review of a Migration Decision / Federal Court Judgment on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Department's 6 September 1999 refusal to reconsider the refused Grant of Residence Status application was a judicially reviewable decision under s 475(1)(c) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)." 'Whether the decision involved error of law by failing to take into account the primary interests of the children in light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.' 'Whether the decision involved an improper exercise of discretionary power under s 476(1)(d) by applying a rule or policy without regard to the merits of the particular case.']

Ratio Decidendi

The 6 September 1999 refusal to reopen the 1988 GORS refusal was not a judicially reviewable decision under s 475(1)(c) because no statutory or regulatory provision authorised the reconsideration process, the Minister had not accepted that the 1988 decisions were void, and the refusal to reopen was at least one step removed from a decision relating to visas. Even if it were reviewable, the Convention on the Rights of the Child ground and the s 476(1)(d) policy ground were misconceived because the Department was not deciding whether to grant visas and was entitled to decline to reopen a decision made more than ten years earlier.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed with costs.']