Julakanti v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 856

Julakanti v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 856

The appeal was dismissed because the employer nomination or appointment required for the Subclass 857 visa had not been approved and had been withdrawn before the delegate's decision, so cl 857.221 of Sch 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) was not satisfied. The appellant's lack of blame was irrelevant, and no legal error was shown in either the Tribunal's decision or the Federal Circuit Court's decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['regional Sponsored Migration Scheme Visa' 'subclass 857 Visa' 'withdrawal of Employer Nomination' 'judicial Review of Migration Review Tribunal Decision' 'tribunal Hearing Non Attendance']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['regional Sponsored Migration Scheme Visa' 'subclass 857 Visa' 'withdrawal of Employer Nomination' 'judicial Review of Migration Review Tribunal Decision' 'tribunal Hearing Non Attendance']

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 Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in finding no legal error in the Tribunal's decision affirming refusal of the appellant's Subclass 857 visa application." 'Whether the appellant satisfied cl 857.221 of Sch 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) where the appointment had not been approved and had been withdrawn before the decision.' 'Whether the Tribunal could proceed to decide the review when the appellant did not attend the hearing after an invitation was sent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the employer nomination or appointment required for the Subclass 857 visa had not been approved and had been withdrawn before the delegate's decision, so cl 857.221 of Sch 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) was not satisfied. The appellant's lack of blame was irrelevant, and no legal error was shown in either the Tribunal's decision or the Federal Circuit Court's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal fixed in the sum of $2,500."]