VAAG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1201

VAAG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1201

Leave to rely on new grounds was refused because the grounds (that the Tribunal failed to consider claims of living in hiding and sur place activities) either did not correspond to claims actually made before the Tribunal or lacked evidentiary support, and the Tribunal adequately addressed the matters raised. The appeal was dismissed as no reviewable error by the lower court or Tribunal was demonstrated.

Parties
Appellant: VAAG; Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Rely on New Grounds and Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on new grounds refused; costs to respondent.
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Jurisdictional Error, Procedural Fairness, Refugee Status Determination, Sur Place Claims
Migration Law Administrative Law Protection Visa Jurisdictional Error Procedural Fairness Refugee Status Determination Sur Place Claims

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

VAAG

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Rely on New Grounds and Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to rely on grounds not argued at first instance
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider claims that the applicant was forced to live in hiding and had a sur place claim based on activities in Australia

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to rely on new grounds was refused because the grounds (that the Tribunal failed to consider claims of living in hiding and sur place activities) either did not correspond to claims actually made before the Tribunal or lacked evidentiary support, and the Tribunal adequately addressed the matters raised. The appeal was dismissed as no reviewable error by the lower court or Tribunal was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to rely on new grounds refused; costs to respondent.

Orders

  • Leave to rely on the grounds specified in the amended notice of appeal filed on 27 May 2004 be refused.
  • The appeal be dismissed.