Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Brehoi v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1839 IMMIGRATION – review of a decision to detain a deportee following a period of custody by a State authority – interaction between ss 253 and 254 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") – ability to detain a deportee under s 254 of the Act – ability to detain a deportee pursuant to s 253 rather than s 254 of the Act where the deportee is in the custody of another authority. Migration Act (Cth) 1958 ss 253, 254 Halmi v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 79 FCR 261 not followed Dung Chi Dang v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Anor (1999) 163 ALR 495 applied Tuiletufuga v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 158 ALR 205 applied NICHOLAS BREHOI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N4 of 2000 MADGWICK J 14 DECEMBER 2000 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N4 of 2000
BETWEEN: NICHOLAS BREHOI
APPLICANT
AND: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: Madgwick J
DATE OF ORDER: 14 DECEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application is dismissed. 2. The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N4 of 2000
BETWEEN: Nicholas Brehoi
APPLICANT
AND: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: Madgwick J
DATE: 14 DECEMBER 2000
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT HIS HONOUR: 1 In this matter the applicant, Mr Brehoi, seeks judicial review of the decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister, that a notice under s 254 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") be issued in respect of him. The applicant also seeks review of the conduct of the respondent in causing the s 254 notice to be issued. 2 In the course of oral argument, the applicant also sought to challenge the legality of his detention under s 253 of the Act. 3 The applicant, unrepresented, filed voluminous written submissions. The following deals with what I take to be the possibly arguable matters raised both orally and in writing.
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