Sidhu v Holmes [2000] FCA 776

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sidhu v Holmes [2000] FCA 776 IMMIGRATION – application for review of Refugee Review Tribunal – jurisdiction under Migration Act unchanged on remittal from High Court – error of law may be inferred from Tribunal's reasons notwithstanding that member stated and purported to apply the correct test – review for inferred error of law is apparently theoretically distinct from unreasonableness – whether likely to be any practical difference - whether Tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons – persecution for flag burning – law of general application without evident ulterior purpose or discriminatory enforcement – no error demonstrated Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 44 Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 430, 476(1)(e), 476(2)(b), 485(1), 485(3)

Abebe v Commonwealth (1999) 162 ALR 1, applied Applicant A v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1997) 142 ALR 331, approved Avon Downs v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1949) 78 CLR 353, applied Chen Shi Hai v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2000) 170 ALR 553, approved Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v A (1999) 168 ALR 594, applied Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu (1999) 162 ALR 577, applied Newall v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1624, approved Paramananthan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs (1998) 160 ALR 24, cited Perampalam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 165, cited Ram v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1995) 128 ALR 705, cited SZ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 458, applied Wu v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1996) 185 CLR 259, applied Zuway v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs (1998) 160 ALR 391, approved