SZLIQ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 1405
The information from Allan Seale's book Growing Vegetables was not country information about China and was not about any class of which the appellant was a member; it was information about growing vegetables in Australian home gardens used to impeach the appellant's credibility. The Tribunal was therefore required to comply with s 424A. Because the Tribunal did not disclose the source, substance and relevance of that information, including any apparent connection between the appellant's claimed farming in China and the Australian home-gardening material, it failed to comply with s 424A and committed jurisdictional error.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 September 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Migration Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; the order of the Federal Magistrates Court was set aside; the Refugee Review Tribunal decision was set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal to be determined according to law.
- Legal Topics
- ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'section 424 a Disclosure Obligation' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal complied with s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) when relying on information about sweet potato planting distances to make an adverse credibility finding.' 'Whether the exception in s 424A(3)(a) applied to the information relied upon by the Tribunal.' 'Whether any failure to disclose the substance and relevance of the information constituted jurisdictional error.']
Ratio Decidendi
The information from Allan Seale's book Growing Vegetables was not country information about China and was not about any class of which the appellant was a member; it was information about growing vegetables in Australian home gardens used to impeach the appellant's credibility. The Tribunal was therefore required to comply with s 424A. Because the Tribunal did not disclose the source, substance and relevance of that information, including any apparent connection between the appellant's claimed farming in China and the Australian home-gardening material, it failed to comply with s 424A and committed jurisdictional error.
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; the order of the Federal Magistrates Court was set aside; the Refugee Review Tribunal decision was set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal to be determined according to law.
Orders
- ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The first respondent pay the costs, if any, of the appellant before the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and of this appeal.' 'The order of the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia is set aside.' 'The decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal handed down on 23 August 2007 is set aside...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment