Ji v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 33; [2002] FCA 166

Ji v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 33; [2002] FCA 166

The appeal was dismissed because neither ground of appeal was made out. The new contention that the appellant could not return to Australia without revealing pro-democracy connections to the Chinese government had not been raised before the Tribunal or the primary judge; the complaint about the Department's conduct did not allege error by the primary judge or the Tribunal; and the primary judge disclosed no appealable error in holding that the Tribunal's findings under cl 850.214 were open on the material before it.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Dismissal of an Application for Review of a Migration Review Tribunal Decision Refusing a Resolution of Status (temporary)(class Uh) Visa Subclass 850 / Full Court Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['resolution of Status (temporary)(class Uh) Visa Subclass 850' 'migration Review Tribunal Review' 'judicial Review Under Pt 8 of the Migration Act 1958' 'clause 850.214 of Sch 2 of the Migration Regulations' 'close Business, Cultural or Personal Ties in Australia' 'compelling or Strongly Compassionate Circumstances']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['resolution of Status (temporary)(class Uh) Visa Subclass 850' 'migration Review Tribunal Review' 'judicial Review Under Pt 8 of the Migration Act 1958' 'clause 850.214 of Sch 2 of the Migration Regulations' 'close Business, Cultural or Personal Ties in Australia' 'compelling or Strongly Compassionate Circumstances']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Dismissal of an Application for Review of a Migration Review Tribunal Decision Refusing a Resolution of Status (temporary)(class Uh) Visa Subclass 850 / Full Court Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge erred in concluding that the Tribunal's findings under cl 850.214 involved no error of law or other reviewable error under Pt 8 of the Migration Act 1958." 'Whether the Tribunal failed to take into account evidence that the appellant could not depart from China between 1993 and 1996.' "Whether complaints about the Department of Immigration's original decision disclosed error by the primary judge or the Tribunal." 'Whether pars (a) and (b) of cl 850.214(2) were cumulative requirements.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because neither ground of appeal was made out. The new contention that the appellant could not return to Australia without revealing pro-democracy connections to the Chinese government had not been raised before the Tribunal or the primary judge; the complaint about the Department's conduct did not allege error by the primary judge or the Tribunal; and the primary judge disclosed no appealable error in holding that the Tribunal's findings under cl 850.214 were open on the material before it.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal."]