Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
M18/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 127
MIGRATION – protection visa – application for constitutional writs – whether the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal was not a bona fide attempt to exercise its power M18/2002 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS V 1068 OF 2003 MOORE, SACKVILLE AND EMMETT JJ 14 MAY 2004 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 1068 OF 2003
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT
BETWEEN: M18/2002
APPELLANTS
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: MOORE, SACKVILLE AND EMMETT JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 14 MAY 2004
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The adult appellant pay the respondent's costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 1068 OF 2003
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT
BETWEEN: M18/2002
APPELLANTS
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: MOORE, SACKVILLE AND EMMETT JJ
DATE: 14 MAY 2004
PLACE: MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction 1 On 29 June 2000 the appellants lodged applications for a protection visa. They were refused by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs ("the Minister") on 9 August 2000. The appellants applied for review of that decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") on 31 August 2000. The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Minister not to grant the protection visas on 21 January 2002. The appellants then lodged an application with the High Court for an order nisi for constitutional writs. The High Court remitted the matter to this Court on 30 July 2002. The application was heard by Sundberg J on 16 October 2003. On 12 November 2003, his Honour made an order dismissing the application. The appellants appeal against that judgment.
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