Tang v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 497

Tang v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 497

Leave to argue a new ground was refused for want of adequate explanation and absence of merit, as the Tribunal had no duty to make further inquiries into the applicant's evidence, and, even if those inquiries had been made, it would not have affected the outcome. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Xuan Tuan Tang; First Respondent: Minister for Home Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Hearing; Leave Sought to Amend Notice of Appeal and Raise New Arguments
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Partner Visas, Substantive Visa Requirements, Leave to Raise New Argument on Appeal, Tribunal's Duty to Inquire, Schedule 3 Compelling Reasons
Migration Administrative Law Practice and Procedure Partner Visas Substantive Visa Requirements Leave to Raise New Argument on Appeal Tribunal's Duty to Inquire Schedule 3 Compelling Reasons

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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Xuan Tuan Tang

Appellant

Minister for Home Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Hearing; Leave Sought to Amend Notice of Appeal and Raise New Arguments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to raise a new ground of appeal not previously advanced
  2. 2 Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred by not making inquiries of supporting friends regarding the de facto relationship
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal was required to critically assess the genuineness and commencement date of the relationship for Schedule 3 compelling reasons

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to argue a new ground was refused for want of adequate explanation and absence of merit, as the Tribunal had no duty to make further inquiries into the applicant's evidence, and, even if those inquiries had been made, it would not have affected the outcome. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The Appellant is to pay the costs of the First Respondent, as either assessed or agreed.