Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NABT of 2001 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 137
MIGRATION – whether primary Judge erred in holding that decision of Refugee Review Tribunal had not involved an error of law within the meaning of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 476
NABT OF 2001 V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS NO. N 1529 OF 2001 BEAUMONT, CARR & SACKVILLE JJ 13 MAY 2002 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1529 OF 2001
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: NABT OF 2001
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: BEAUMONT, CARR & SACKVILLE JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 13 MAY 2002
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed, with costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1529 OF 2001
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: NABT OF 2001
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: BEAUMONT, CARR & SACKVILLE JJ
DATE: 13 MAY 2002
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BEAUMONT j: 1 This appeal is from a judgment of Allsop J given on 26 October 2001, dismissing an appeal from a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") made on 29 June 2001, affirming a decision of the Minister's delegate not to grant the appellant a protection visa. 2 The appellant is 48 years old and a citizen of India. He arrived in Australia in September 1996 and lodged an application for a protection visa in October of that year. In April 1997, the Minister's delegate refused his application. The appellant then applied for a review of that decision, but in April 1998 the Tribunal affirmed the Minister's decision. The appellant then applied to this Court for judicial review of the Tribunal's decision. On 16 June 1999, Moore J set aside that decision and remitted the matter. A further hearing took place before the Tribunal in November 1999. On 29 June 2001, a differently constituted Tribunal, as mentioned, affirmed the Minister's decision refusing a protection visa. 3 The appellant was unrepresented before Allsop J and before us.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate