Ramandeep v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1137

Ramandeep v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1137

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant did not establish error by the primary judge or the Tribunal. The Tribunal reached the only decision available because the required employer nomination had been refused and the nominator had withdrawn its Tribunal review application, so cl 187.233(3) could not be satisfied and the visa could not be granted. Grounds two and three were not raised before the primary judge, were not established by evidence, and could not show Tribunal error. Any possible Tribunal error would have been immaterial and not jurisdictional.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Orders Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Final Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['regional Employer Nomination (permanent) (class Rn) (subclass 187) Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'dismissal of Appeal in Absence of Appellant' 'jurisdictional Error']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['regional Employer Nomination (permanent) (class Rn) (subclass 187) Visa' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'approved Nomination Requirement' 'dismissal of Appeal in Absence of Appellant' 'jurisdictional Error']

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

Migration Appeal From Orders Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Australia From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia; Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal should proceed and be dismissed in the absence of the appellant.' 'Whether the Tribunal took into account irrelevant considerations or erred in making findings of fact.' "Whether grounds concerning the employer's withdrawal of its Tribunal application could be relied on when they were not raised before the primary judge and were not established by evidence." 'Whether the absence of an approved nomination under cl 187.233(3) meant the visa could not be granted and any alleged Tribunal error was immaterial.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant did not establish error by the primary judge or the Tribunal. The Tribunal reached the only decision available because the required employer nomination had been refused and the nominator had withdrawn its Tribunal review application, so cl 187.233(3) could not be satisfied and the visa could not be granted. Grounds two and three were not raised before the primary judge, were not established by evidence, and could not show Tribunal error. Any possible Tribunal error would have been immaterial and not jurisdictional.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the amount of $4,000." 'The first respondent serve a copy of these orders on the appellant, by email, at the address recorded in the notice of appeal.' 'Any application under rule 36.75(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) be...