Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SHJB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 502 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 101, 108, 109 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ss 39B, 474 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Ex parte Applicants S134/2002 (2003) 195 ALR 1 cited Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia (2003) 195 ALR 24 cited Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu (1999) 197 CLR 611 cited Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Rajalingam (1999) 93 FCR 220 cited Associated Provincial Picture Houses Limited v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 cited SHJB v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS S 407 OF 2003 SELWAY J 22 MAY 2003 ADELAIDE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 407 OF 2003
BETWEEN: SHJB
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: SELWAY J
DATE OF ORDER: 22 MAY 2003
WHERE MADE: ADELAIDE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for judicial review is dismissed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 407 OF 2003
BETWEEN: SHJB
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: SELWAY J
DATE: 22 MAY 2003
PLACE: ADELAIDE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant is seeking judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') affirming that the applicant's temporary protection visa should be cancelled. The reason for cancellation was that the applicant had not correctly answered the questions on his application form. The applicant had claimed that he was from Afghanistan. The Tribunal found that he was, in fact, from Pakistan. The issue on the judicial review proceedings is whether there was any jurisdictional error by the Tribunal in reaching its decision. For the reasons given below I conclude that there was no jurisdictional error and the application for judicial review must be dismissed.
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