SZLZS v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 748

SZLZS v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 748

The appellant's earlier protection visa application had been refused and no s 48B determination had been made, so s 48A barred his further protection visa application. The argument that the earlier application was not valid because of changes to Form 866 had been rejected in BVJ16 and multiple Federal Court decisions, and Reeves J considered BVJ16 plainly correct. The primary judge therefore made no error in following BVJ16 and dismissing the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Appeal From SZLZS V Minister for Immigration [2017] FCCA 2578
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'invalid Visa Application' 'section 48 a Bar on Further Protection Visa Applications' 'form 866' 'judicial Review']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'invalid Visa Application' 'section 48 a Bar on Further Protection Visa Applications' 'form 866' 'judicial 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

Migration Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Appeal From SZLZS V Minister for Immigration [2017] FCCA 2578

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s 48A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) barred the appellant from making a further protection visa application after an earlier protection visa application had been refused.' "Whether s 48A did not apply because the Form 866 used for the appellant's 2007 protection visa application was in a different form to that originally prescribed by the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)." 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in following BVJ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1205 and related Federal Court decisions.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's earlier protection visa application had been refused and no s 48B determination had been made, so s 48A barred his further protection visa application. The argument that the earlier application was not valid because of changes to Form 866 had been rejected in BVJ16 and multiple Federal Court decisions, and Reeves J considered BVJ16 plainly correct. The primary judge therefore made no error in following BVJ16 and dismissing the application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal filed on 13 November 2017 is dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs, to be taxed if not agreed."]