Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WAEP v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2004] FCA 13
MIGRATION – protection visa – whether Refugee Review Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error by failing to identify correctly the legal test for persecution – whether Tribunal failed to take into account relevant factors about ongoing presence of the Taliban in Afghanistan – whether Tribunal failed to consider if the State was able to provide protection from persecution – whether it is necessary to find a real risk of persecution before considering the question of the State's ability to provide protection. Migration Act 1958 (Cth) SFGB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 231 considered and distinguished
WAEP v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
W105 of 2003
CARR J
19 JANUARY 2004
PERTH
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W105 OF 2003
BETWEEN: WAEP
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: CARR J
DATE OF ORDER: 19 JANUARY 2004
WHERE MADE: PERTH
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant 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
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W105 OF 2003
BETWEEN: WAEP
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: CARR J
DATE: 19 JANUARY 2004
PLACE: PERTH
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
introduction 1 This is an appeal from a decision of a Federal Magistrate given on 24 April 2003. His Honour's decision was to dismiss the appellant's application for an order of review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal, made on 30 January 2002, to affirm a decision of a delegate of the respondent not to grant the appellant a protection visa. The Chief Justice, acting under s 25(1A) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) directed that the appeal be heard by a single judge.
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