Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Lam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1226 MIGRATION – judicial review of a decision of the Minister under s 501A(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to refuse to grant the applicant a Class 812 Transitional (Permanent) Visa – delegate of the Minister had earlier decided to refuse to grant the visa under s 501 on the ground that the applicant, who had been convicted and sentenced to nine years and four months imprisonment for possession of heroin, was not a person of good character and therefore could not satisfy criterion 4001 of the Migration (1993) Regulations – the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ultimately set aside that decision, substituted a finding that the applicant did meet the requirements of criterion 4001 and remitted the matter to the delegate for consideration of the remaining criteria for the grant of the visa – the Minister then exercised his power under s 501A(2) to refuse to grant the visa on the ground that the Minister suspected that the applicant did not pass the character test in s 501 and the applicant had not satisfied the Minister that he did, and because the refusal of the visa was in the national interest – whether the Minister lacked jurisdiction to make the decision under s 501A – whether it could be said that the Tribunal had made a decision, within the meaning of s 501A(1)(c), "to grant a visa to a person as a result of not exercising the power conferred by subsection 501(1) to refuse to grant a visa to the person" – whether a literal construction of s 501A(1)(c) would produce a result that is absurd and at odds with the apparent object of the provision – whether the words would bear an alternative construction which would give effect to the apparent object of the provision Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 476(1)(b) and (c), s 501, s 501A Migration (1993) Regulations, Sch 2 Item 812.736(1), Sch 4 criterion 4001 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), s 43(1) Secretary, Department of Social Security v Hodgson (1992) 37 FCR 32, considered Department of Social Security v Ridley (1992) 40 FCR 43, referred to Occidental Life Insurance Company of Australia Ltd v Life Style Planners Pty Ltd (1992) 38 FCR 444, referred to Minister of State for Resources v Dover Fisheries Pty Ltd (1993) 43 FCR 565, referred to Daher v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1997) 77 FCR 107, referred to Connections 2000 Pty Ltd and Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [1999] AATA 357, considered Ross and Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [1999] AATA 965, considered Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Sharma (1999) 90 FCR 513, referred to Tutugri v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 95 FCR 592, referred to KWONG LEUNG LAM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 710 OF 2000 LEHANE J 1 SEPTEMBER 2000 SYDNEY
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