Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v McDade [2001] FCA 457
MIGRATION – cancellation by Minister of a Transitional (Permanent) visa under s 109 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) where Minister had previously given, on different occasions, two notices, both purportedly under s 107 of Act – respondent found to have made statements false or misleading in a material particular to an officer before visa granted to him – respondent held visa as a result of operation of subreg 16(2) or 4(1) of Migration Reform (Transitional Provisions) Regulations – whether first notice valid – first notice referring to appellant's not having complied with ss 101, 103 and 104 of Act which came into force after alleged non-compliance –comparable former s 20 of the Act applied at time of alleged non-compliance – first notice not a valid notice under s 107 with result that Minister not prevented from giving second notice based on same facts, relying on former s 20 ESTOPPEL – whether Minister estopped by implied representation from contending that purported notice under s 107 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was invalid – whether detrimental reliance present – effect of suggested estoppel to prevent Minister from ever giving valid notice under s 107 based on same facts – suggested estoppel substantive rather than procedural – discretionary power given by statute to be exercised in public interest
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 101, 103, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 115(3)
Iyer v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1788, cited Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Jalal [2000] FCA 1370, cited Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs v Dela Cruz (1992) 34 FCR 348, cited Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs v Kurtovic (1990) 21 FCR 193, cited Attorney-General (NSW) v Quin (1990) 170 CLR 1, cited Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Petrovski (1997) 73 FCR 303, distinguished MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS v McDADE W 83 of 2000 CARR, LINDGREN AND KATZ JJ 26 APRIL 2001 PERTH
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