Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA MIGRATION - application for review of decision of respondent - whether applicant eligible for absorbed person visa - whether applicant had ceased to be an immigrant by reason of having become a prohibited immigrant. Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5(1), 34 Migration Act 1958-73 (Cth), ss 5(1), 6, 7 Migration Amendment Act 1983 (Cth), ss 8, 38
Boon Yin Chee v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (unreported, 13 June 1997, Full Federal Court), applied Yong v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 67 FCR 566, followed Tjandra v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 67 FCR 577, followed Rooney v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 67 FCR 590, followed EQI WONG v THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS NG 836 OF 1995 TAMBERLIN J SYDNEY 26 SEPTEMBER 1997
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 836 of 1995
BETWEEN: EQI WONG
Applicant
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION
AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J
DATE OF ORDER: 26 SEPTEMBER 1997
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: The application be dismissed. 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 NG 836 of 1995
BETWEEN: EQI WONG
Applicant
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION
AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J
DATE: 26 SEPTEMBER 1997
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is an application to review the decision of the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs ("the Minister"), notified on or about 9 October 1995, which refused to accept that the applicant was on 1 September 1994 granted an absorbed person visa pursuant to s 34 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). The grounds for the application are set out in the Amended Application filed on 14 December 1995. They are: "1. That the decision involved an error of law, being an incorrect interpretation of the applicable law or an incorrect application of the law to the facts as found by the person who made the decision. Particulars (a) The Respondent erroneously decided that, because the applicant had not been "absorbed" pursuant to the common law doctrine of absorption in force prior to 2 April 1984, the Applicant was not granted an Absorbed Person Visa pursuant to Section 34 of the Migration Act 1958 on 1 September 1994.
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