NAFC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1587

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAFC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1587 MIGRATION – application for an order restraining Minister from removing applicant from Sydney pending final determination for application for review of decision to cancel protection visa or determination of application for bridging visa – whether requirement in s 256 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) that Minister provide all "reasonable facilities" for the obtaining of legal advice or taking legal proceedings required applicant to remain in Sydney with legal representatives.

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 191, 196, 256 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Applicant A v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1997) 190 CLR 225 cited Chu Kheng Lim v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1992) 176 CLR 1 cited Commonwealth v Tasmania (The Tasmanian Dam Case) (1983) 158 CLR 1 cited Fang v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 135 ALR 583 cited Howard v Jarvis (1958) 98 CLR 177 cited Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission v Secretary, Department of Immigration (1996) 67 FCR 83 cited Le v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1994) 53 FCR 27 considered Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh (1995) 183 CLR 273 cited NAKG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2000] FCA 997 considered Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie (1998) 193 CLR 280 cited R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Leech [1994] QB 198 cited R v Secretary of State for the Home Dept; Ex parte McAvoy (1984) 1 WLR 1408 considered R v Secretary of State for the Home Dept; Ex parte Herbage [1987] 1 QB 872 considered R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison; Ex parte Hague [1992] 1 AC 58 considered Ruddock v Vadarlis (2001) 183 ALR 1 cited Slivak v Lurgi (Australia) Pty Ltd (2001) 177 ALR 585 cited Thiel v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1990) 171 CLR 338 cited