Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA MIGRATION LAW - subclass of temporary entry visas created on humanitarian grounds for Sri Lankan nationals - regulations made which enabled some holders of the visa subclass to qualify for permanent visas but made no provision for others - distinction based on date of entry to Australia of visa holder - whether regulations constituted a valid exercise of regulation making power under Migration Act 1958 - whether regulations constituted unlawful discrimination under the Racial Discrimination Act 1973 - invalidity of regulations on the ground of unreasonableness - reasonable proportionality test of validity - whether unreasonableness test is a criterion for determining reasonable proportionality. DISCRIMINATION LAW - whether regulations amending criteria for the humanitarian visa subclass inconsistent with, or constituting unlawful discrimination under Racial Discrimination Act - whether direct discrimination - distinction between 'nationality' and 'national origin' - whether making of the regulation nullifies or impairs any human right or freedom - whether indirect discrimination. Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 4, 30, 31, 504(1) Racial Discrimination Act 1973 (Cth) ss 9(1) and 9(1A) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 16A Migration Regulations Schedule 2, Part 435 Migration Regulations (Amendment) No 184 of 1997 Migration Regulations (Amendment) No279 of 1997
South Australia v Tanner (1989) 166 CLR 161, considered and applied Qiu v Minister for Immigration (1994) 55 FCR 439 considered Bienke v Minister for Primary Industries and Energy (1995) 63 FCR 567 considered Eremin v Minister for Immigration (Wilcox J, 1 August 1990, unreported; and on appeal (1990) 21 ALD 69) considered Coleman v Gray (1994) 55 FCR 412 applied Ealing London Borough Council v Race Relations Board [1972] AC 342 followed Ebber v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1995) 129 ALR 455 followed Australian Medical Council v Wilson (1996) 68 FCR 46 considered and followed Commonwealth Bank v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1997) 150 ALR cited
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