Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Chinnaiyan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 180 MIGRATION – application for protection visa – no point of principle
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) SHANMUGAVEL CHINNAIYAN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 1271 of 2001 MOORE J 1 MARCH 2002 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1271 of 2001
BETWEEN: SHANMUGAVEL CHINNAIYAN
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 1 MARCH 2002
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed with 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 N1271 of 2001
BETWEEN: SHANMUGAVEL CHINNAIYAN
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE: 1 MARCH 2002
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction 1 This is an application by Shanmugavel Chinnaiyan ("the applicant") for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") of 23 August 2001 affirming a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ("the Minister"), refusing to grant the applicant a protection visa. The criterion for the grant of such a visa is that the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951 as amended by the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees of 31 January 1967 ("the Convention").
Background 2 The applicant, who is a citizen of India, arrived in Australia on 4 April 1998. On 15 May 1998 he lodged an application with the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs for a protection visa under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). On 25 September 1998 a delegate of the Minister refused to grant a protection visa and on 8 October 1998 the applicant applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision.
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