Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Modi v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 529
MIGRATION – student visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether condition of earlier visa "flouted" WORDS AND PHRASES – "flouted" "substantial compliance" Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 359A, 368, 476(1)(e) Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) reg 560.213, Sch 2 cond 8202 Kim v Witton (1995) 59 FCR 258 followed Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Singh [2000] 98 FCR 469 followed
JAY MODI v THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS V 994 OF 2000 HEEREY J 17 MAY 2001 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 994 OF 2000
BETWEEN: JAY MODI
APPLICANT
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HEEREY J
DATE OF ORDER: 17 MAY 2001
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The decision under review is aside. 2. The application for review is remitted to the Migration Review Tribunal for further consideration according to law. 3. The respondent pay the applicant's costs to be taxed, including reserved costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 994 OF 2000
BETWEEN: JAY MODI
APPLICANT
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HEEREY J
DATE: 17 MAY 2001
PLACE: MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant seeks review under Pt 8 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal made on 29 November 2000 affirming the decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) Sub-class 560 visa. 2 The applicant made application on 15 March 2000 for this visa having received two earlier visas. One of the criteria (reg 560.213) required that, at the time of the application, "… the applicant has complied substantially with the conditions to which the visa (if any) held, or last held, by the applicant is, or was, subject." 3 The period of his last held visa was 5 February 1998 to 15 March 2000. 4 The relevant condition was that prescribed by 8202 in Sch 2: "The holder must satisfy course requirements."
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