Braganza v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 318

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Braganza v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 318 MIGRATION – application for review to Migration Review Tribunal – requirement in s 347(1)(c) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) that application for review be accompanied by prescribed fee (if any) – application to waive prescribed fee lodged within prescribed period – waiver rejected after expiration of prescribed period - whether failure to pay prescribed fee within prescribed period renders application for review incompetent - whether primary judge erred in holding that late payment of fee necessarily precluded Tribunal from reviewing decision of Minister's delegate. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – whether purpose of Act that an act done in breach of provisions should be invalid – regard to be had to scope and object of whole statute – presumption that "absurd" result not intended – provision not to be construed so as to produce unworkable or impracticable result.

WORDS AND PHRASES – "accompanied by"; "if any"; "is properly made"; "no fee is payable"; "should not be paid". Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 347(1), 348, 504(1)(b) Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) reg 4.13(2), (4) Kirk v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 87 FCR 99 distinguished Tabet v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1997) 75 FCR 446 considered Coung Van Nguyen v Gerkens (unreported, 8 October 1996) referred to Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 at 390-391 considered Hatton v Beaumont [1977] 2 NSWLR 211 considered Wielgus v Removal Review Authority [1994] 1 NZLR 73 referred to Helman v Byron Shire Council (1995) 87 LGERA 349 applied PETER BRAGANZA V MINSTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N791 OF 2000 WILCOX, WEINBERG AND STONE JJ 28 MARCH 2001 SYDNEY