Zahid v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1108

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Zahid v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1108 MIGRATION – privative clause - applicant for a Family Residence (Class AO) visa claimed to be both a "remaining relative" and a "special need relative" of an Australian citizen –Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) failed to address whether the applicant qualified as a remaining relative – application of s 474(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - whether MRT's failure amounted to an infringement of an "inviolable limitation" or a "jurisdictional factor" – whether MRT's decision insulated from jurisdictional error by s 474(1) of the Migration Act.

Constitution, s 75(v) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39B(1) Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 116, 128, 129, 131, 474 Migration Legislation Amendment (Judicial Review) Act 2001 (Cth) Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), rr 1.03, 1.15, schedule 2 sub-class 806 Zahid v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 670, referred to. Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163, cited. NAAV v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 228, followed. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf (2001) 180 ALR 1, cited. R v Coldham; Ex parte The Australian Workers Union (1983) 153 CLR 415, cited. The Coal Miners' Industrial Union of Workers of Western Australia v Amalgamated Collieries of Western Australia Ltd (1960) 104 CLR 437, cited. R v Murray; Ex parte Proctor (1949) 77 CLR 387, cited. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu (1999) 197 CLR 611, cited. SBBK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 265, not followed. NAAG of 2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 713, followed.

ZAHID v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 91 OF 2002 SACKVILLE J SYDNEY 10 SEPTEMBER 2002