Karnadi, A. v. Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1988] FCA 9

JUDGMENT No.. AnntfuB.B

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

NO VG 3 OF 1988

wee ew

GENERAL DIVISION

Between: ADE KARNADT

(Applicant)

And: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND

ETHNIC AFFAIRS

(Respondent)

Coram: Ryan J Date: 12 January 1988

Place: Melbourne

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is an application for interlocutory orders staying all proceedings to remove the applicant from Australia pending the hearing and determination of his substantive

application under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial

Review) Act 1974 ("the Act") for review of decisions refusing

the applicant a temporary entry permit under the Migration Act 1958 and that the applicant be deported from Australia.

By his substantive application the applicant has contended that the decisions are reviewable on the following

grounds :-

29 JANI988

FEDERAL COURT CE j AUSTRALIA FRINGIPAL

(sha relate cohaatnat AaaRana

1 ee

1.

(a) A breach of the rules of natural justice

and/or procedural fairness occurred in the making or failure to make each decision.

(b) The making of each decision was an

improper exercise of the power conferred on the Respondent in that:

(i) there was a failure to take into account relevant considerations in the exercise of the power;

(ii) there was an exercise of power in accordance with rules of policy without regard to the merits of a particular case;

(iii) irrelevant considerations were taken into account;

(iv) there was an exercise of power by the Respondent that was so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have exercised the power in such a way;

(v) the making of the decisions complained of in this Application were wholly or in part based on erroneous factual considerations and on assumptions that had no factual basis;

(vi) the making of the decisions complained of in this Application were wholly or in part based on an error of law in that the decision maker did not direct his attention to the question of whether there were factors which were relevant to be taken into account pursuant to the provisions of s.6A(1)(b) of the Migration Act as distinct from whether or not there were strong compassionate or humanitarian grounds which would enable the grant of an entry permit pursuant to the provisions of s.6A(1)(e) of