Dahi v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 784

Dahi v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 784

The application for review was not accompanied by the prescribed fee within the statutory time limit; compliance with the fee requirement is mandatory, and consequently, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the review. The appellant's subsequent payment did not remedy the initial non-compliance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['tribunal Jurisdiction' 'visa Cancellation' 'procedural Compliance' 'prescribed Fees' 'application for Review']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['tribunal Jurisdiction' 'visa Cancellation' 'procedural Compliance' 'prescribed Fees' 'application for 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

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the decision to cancel appellant's visa when the application for review was not accompanied by the prescribed fee"]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review was not accompanied by the prescribed fee within the statutory time limit; compliance with the fee requirement is mandatory, and consequently, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the review. The appellant's subsequent payment did not remedy the initial non-compliance.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' 'The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement.']