MZACS v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 852
The appellant failed to identify any appellable or jurisdictional error on the part of the Federal Circuit Court or the Tribunal. No adverse information had been identified as withheld, and grounds raised for the appeal were not made out. The application for leave to appeal therefore had no reasonable prospects of success and must be dismissed with costs.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 August 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court Decision, Heard and Determined by the Federal Court of Australia
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ['judicial Review of Migration Decision' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court Decision, Heard and Determined by the Federal Court of Australia
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Tribunal failed to disclose adverse information in breach of s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' 'Whether any jurisdictional error was made by the Tribunal or the Federal Circuit Court']
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to identify any appellable or jurisdictional error on the part of the Federal Circuit Court or the Tribunal. No adverse information had been identified as withheld, and grounds raised for the appeal were not made out. The application for leave to appeal therefore had no reasonable prospects of success and must be dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.']
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