Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Raharjo v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1726 IMMIGRATION – application for a protection visa – whether no evidence upon which decision made – whether decision induced by actual bias – no case made out. Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Jia v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 84 FCR 87 referred to Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Indatissa (2001) 64 ALD 1 referred to FAJAR SUDI RAHARJO v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 1188 of 2001 CONTI J 5 DECEMBER 2001 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1188 OF 2001
BETWEEN: FAJAR SUDI RAHARJO
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: CONTI J
DATE OF ORDER: 5 DECEMBER 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1188 OF 2001
BETWEEN: FAJAR SUDI RAHARJO
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: CONTI J
DATE: 5 DECEMBER 2001
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Application for review 1 The application for review is brought against the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") made on 17 July 2001, whereby the Tribunal affirmed a decision of the delegate of the Minister not to grant the applicant a protection visa because as in the case of the delegate, the Tribunal expressed a dissatisfaction that the applicant was a refugee within the Convention definition. The hearing of the application had been originally fixed for 6 February 2002. However, at a directions hearing on 16 November 2001, which the applicant attended in person, I brought forward the hearing date to today, by reason of a gap which had emerged in my commitments. The applicant did not appear at the hearing and did not, so far as I am aware, communicate with the court in the meantime.
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