NANO v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs & NANP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 205

NANO v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs & NANP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 205

The appeals were dismissed because no constitutional issue was demonstrated, the facts found by the MRT were for that Tribunal, there was no substantiation of bad faith by the delegate, and no jurisdictional error on the part of the MRT was identified.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: NANO; Appellant: NANP; Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeals dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Bridging Visas, Judicial Review, Migration Review Tribunal, Constitutional Law Arguments
Immigration Law Administrative Law Bridging Visas Judicial Review Migration Review Tribunal Constitutional Law Arguments

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NANO

Appellant

NANP

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary judge erred in finding that the applications did not raise constitutional questions within the meaning of s78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the primary judge erred in finding that the delegate was not acting in bad faith in the making of the decision
  3. 3 Whether the Migration Review Tribunal erred in affirming the refusal of Bridging Visa E applications

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals were dismissed because no constitutional issue was demonstrated, the facts found by the MRT were for that Tribunal, there was no substantiation of bad faith by the delegate, and no jurisdictional error on the part of the MRT was identified.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeals be dismissed.
  • The appellants pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.