Iyer v Minister For Immigration [2000] FCA 1788

Iyer v Minister For Immigration [2000] FCA 1788

Leave was required because the original grounds merely paraphrased s 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and did not disclose substantive reasons for challenging the Tribunal's decision. Leave was refused because the proposed new grounds had no reasonable prospect of success: the Tribunal had considered whether...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal Concerning Refusal of Protection Visa and Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
Leave to raise grounds not relied upon before the primary judge refused; appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'real Chance of Persecution' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'convention Based Persecution']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal' 'real Chance of Persecution' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'convention Based Persecution']

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

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal Concerning Refusal of Protection Visa and Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant required leave to raise grounds not argued before the primary judge.' 'Whether it was expedient and in the interests of justice to allow new grounds to be argued on appeal.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to make findings on a material question of fact concerning the chance that the LTTE would regain control of Jaffna and forcibly recruit the appellant's son." 'Whether the Tribunal was required to make findings about alleged LTTE extortion and whether it constituted Convention-based persecution.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the appellant's claimed fear relating to forcible recruitment of his son and further extortion." 'Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons under s 430 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was required because the original grounds merely paraphrased s 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and did not disclose substantive reasons for challenging the Tribunal's decision. Leave was refused because the proposed new grounds had no reasonable prospect of success: the Tribunal had considered whether there was a real chance of persecution in Jaffna now or in the foreseeable future, including the claimed forcible recruitment of the appellant's son; it was not required to give reasons for rejecting evidence inconsistent with its findings; and, once it found that the appellant did not genuinely fear Convention-based persecution, it was unnecessary to determine whether alleged...

Court Disposition

Leave to raise grounds not relied upon before the primary judge refused; appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal."]