MacMillan, R. v. Eyles, P.B. [1985] FCA 102

MacMillan, R. v. Eyles, P.B. [1985] FCA 102

The applicant failed to demonstrate any substantial ground or serious question to be tried that would justify a stay. The material before the respondent supported the deportation order, and there was no denial of natural justice or improper exercise of power shown.

Parties
Applicant: Ronald Macmillan; Respondent: Peter Brian Eyles
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 1985
Procedural Posture
Motion / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Execution Pending Review
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Deportation, Stay of Execution, Judicial Review, Natural Justice, Migration Act 1958

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Macmillan

Applicant

Peter Brian Eyles

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Motion / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Execution Pending Review

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution of a deportation order pending determination of a judicial review application
  2. 2 Whether there are sufficient grounds to argue that the deportation order was made in breach of natural justice or as an improper exercise of power under the Migration Act 1958

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any substantial ground or serious question to be tried that would justify a stay. The material before the respondent supported the deportation order, and there was no denial of natural justice or improper exercise of power shown.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • The motion for a stay of execution of the deportation order dated 7 February 1985 is dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the motion.