SZUQD v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 994

SZUQD v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 994

Leave to rely on grounds 1 to 3 was refused because those grounds were new, were directed to alleged errors by the Tribunal rather than any error by the Federal Circuit Court, and no written or oral submissions identified any such error. Ground 4 failed because it merely challenged the Tribunal's factual findings and was an impermissible attempt to obtain merits review. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Appeal Dismissed; Leave to Rely on New Grounds Refused
Outcome
Leave to rely upon grounds 1 to 3 inclusive of the notice of appeal refused; appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'credibility Findings' 'merits Review' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'credibility Findings' 'merits Review' 'leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal']

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 the Federal Circuit Court of Australia / Appeal Dismissed; Leave to Rely on New Grounds Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to rely upon grounds 1 to 3 of the notice of appeal that were not raised before the Federal Circuit Court.' "Whether the Federal Circuit Court made any identifiable error in dismissing the application for judicial review of the Tribunal's decision." "Whether the appellant's fourth ground was an impermissible attempt to obtain merits review of the Tribunal's factual findings."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to rely on grounds 1 to 3 was refused because those grounds were new, were directed to alleged errors by the Tribunal rather than any error by the Federal Circuit Court, and no written or oral submissions identified any such error. Ground 4 failed because it merely challenged the Tribunal's factual findings and was an impermissible attempt to obtain merits review. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Leave to rely upon grounds 1 to 3 inclusive of the notice of appeal refused; appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The name of the second respondent, "Refugee Review Tribunal", be amended to "Administrative Appeals Tribunal".' 'Leave to rely upon grounds 1 to 3 inclusive of the notice of appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellant is to pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal."]