Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bae v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 578
MIGRATION – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – General (Residence) (Class AS) visa sub-class 805 – exceptional record of achievement in an occupation, profession or activity Migration Act 1985 (Cth) s 476(1)(e) SANG DEOK BAE & ORS v THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS V 800 OF 2000 HEEREY J 18 MAY 2001 MELBOURNE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 800 OF 2000
BETWEEN: SANG DEOK BAE
FIRST APPLICANT
SUN IEE BAE
SECOND APPLICANT
HEE WON BAE
THIRD APPLICANT
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HEEREY J
DATE OF ORDER: 18 MAY 2001
WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The decision under review is set aside. 2. The application under review is remitted to the Migration Review Tribunal differently constituted for reconsideration according to law. 3. The respondent pay the applicant's costs, 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 800 OF 2000
BETWEEN: SANG DEOK BAE
FIRST APPLICANT
SUN IEE BAE
SECOND APPLICANT
HEE WON BAE
THIRD APPLICANT
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HEEREY J
DATE: 18 MAY 2001
PLACE: MELBOURNE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicants seek review under Pt 8 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal made on 3 October 2000 affirming a decision to refuse the grant to the first applicant of a General (Residence) (Class AS) visa sub-class 805. The second and third applicants are the wife and son of the first applicant, to whom I shall refer simply as "the applicant". 2 The applicant is a welder. He is a Korean national. Amongst other things, the conditions he had to satisfy was that, as at the date of his visa application (2 May 1997), (a) he had an exceptional record of achievement in an occupation, profession or activity: 805.212(7)(a)(i) (b) he would be asset to the Australian community: 7(a)(ii) (c) he would have no difficulty in obtaining employment: 7(a)(iii). 3 The Tribunal found that the applicant satisfied 7(a)(ii) and (iii) but failed to satisfy (i).
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