Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DYK16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 222 Appeal from: DYK16 v Minister for Immigration [2017] FCCA 2749
File number: VID 1315 of 2017
Judges: COLLIER, MIDDLETON AND RANGIAH JJ
Date of judgment: 7 December 2018
Catchwords: MIGRATION – appeal from decision of Federal Circuit Court – whether Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) failed to act reasonably – whether IAA failed to invite appellant to oral interview – whether IAA failed to seek further evidence – whether duty exists for IAA to seek new information upon request by visa applicants – whether intelligible basis for IAA's decision not to conduct interview – whether IAA required to explain decisions refusing requests – where appellant had adequate opportunity to advance evidence and submissions to support claims – purpose of fast track review process – held: IAA did not act unreasonably – held: no appellable error in primary Judge's reasons – appeal dismissed PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where leave required on appeal to raise questions not before primary Judge – consideration of merits of substantive appeal – consideration of new authorities post-dating primary decision – leave granted to raise new grounds
Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 5H(1), 36(2)(a), 36(2)(aa), 36(2A), 368, 430, 473CB, 473CC, 473DA, 473DB, 473DC, 473DC(1), 473DC(2), 473DD, 473DD(a), 473DD(b)(ii), 473DE, 473DE(1)(a), 473DE(1)(b), 473DF(2), 473EA, 473EA(1), 473EA(2), Pt 7AA Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) reg 4.42(a)
Cases cited: CCQ17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1641 CGL17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1747 CSR16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 474 DBA16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1580 Decor Corp Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc [1991] FCA 844; (1991) 33 FCR 397 DGZ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 12 DJF16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1285 DYK16 v Minister for Immigration [2017] FCCA 2749 Gupta v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 172; (2017) 255 FCR 486 Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 915; (2014) 236 FCR 393 Minister for Immigration & Border Protection v SZUXN [2016] FCA 516; (2016) 69 AAR 210 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v CRY16 [2017] FCAFC 210; (2017) 253 FCR 475 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh [2014] FCAFC 1; (2014) 231 FCR 437 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZIAI [2009] HCA 39; (2009) 259 ALR 429 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZMDS [2010] HCA 16; (2010) 240 CLR 611 Phoenix Institute of Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2017] FCAFC 155 Plaintiff M174/2016 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) [2018] HCA 16; 92 ALJR 481 Samsung Electronics Co Limited v Apple Inc [2013] FCAFC 138
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