Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Makdessi v The Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 134
IMMIGRATION – application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") – adequacy of Tribunal's findings on material facts – content of necessity to "set out" findings – failure of Tribunal to consider the ability of the state of nationality to protect citizens from religious persecution – any failing in the Tribunal's reasons was not material.
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 430, 476(1), 476(4)(b)
Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Singh (2000) 98 FCR 469, applied Re The Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Durairajasingham (2000) 74 ALJR 405, applied Ram v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs (1995) 57 FCR 565, applied Applicant A v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1997) 190 CLR 225, applied Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Thiyagarajah (2000) 74 ALJR 549, applied MOUSSA NICOLAS MAKDESSI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 57 of 2000
MADGWICK J SYDNEY 23 FEBRUARY 2001
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 57 of 2000
BETWEEN: MOUSSA NICOLAS MAKDESSI
APPLICANT
AND: MINSTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MADGWICK J
DATE OF ORDER: 23 FEBRUARY 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 57 of 2000
BETWEEN: MOUSSA NICOLAS MAKDESSI
APPLICANT
AND: MINSTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MADGWICK J
DATE: 23 FEBRUARY 2001
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT HIS HONOUR: 1 The applicant seeks judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") of 22 December 1999, affirming a decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister not to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicants seeks review on two grounds. Firstly, it is claimed that the procedures required to be observed by s 430(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") were not observed by the Tribunal. Secondly, the applicant claims that the Tribunal's decision involved an error of law.
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