Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Applicants 325/2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2006] FCAFC 59
PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – history of litigation in the Refugee Review Tribunal, Federal Court and High Court involving husband wife and two sons as applicants for refugee status – earlier segments of litigation favourable to appellants – ultimate proceedings in Federal Court at first instance pursued unsuccessfully by present appellants – objection to competency of ultimate application for leave to review or appeal from Federal Court decision at first instance – issues raised on ultimate application for leave to appeal addressed in any event – all issues resolved in favour of Minister
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 23, 24(1AAA), 25(2B), s 25(2) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 417
Applicants S61 of 2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal (2004) 206 ALR 461 discussed BZAC v Refugee Review Tribunal [2005] FCA 675 applied Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v Applicants S194 of 2002 (2003) 79 ALD 715 discussed NAHQ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 134 FCR 377cited NBDW v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 63 discussed Perera v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 92 FCR 6cited and distinguished
APPLICANTS 325/2002 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
NSD 313 OF 2005
MOORE, NICHOLSON AND CONTI JJ
18 MAY 2006
SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALESDISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 313 OF 2005
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: APPLICANTS 325/2002
APPELLANTS
AND: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
SECOND RESPONDENT
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