Kim v Minister For Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 31

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Kim v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 31 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – whether the decision is a privative clause decision – whether the decision contained a jurisdictional error – whether there was a failure to recognise the nature and the extent of the power exercised MIGRATION – business visa – secondary business visa – standard of proof required by 'would result' in s 135(5) STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – whether section 134 contains a residual discretion – whether s 134 imposes a duty on the Minister to exercise the power to cancel a visa PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – issue raised on appeal that was not raised before the Tribunal

Statutes Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 33(2A) Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 134(1)-(5), 41(1), 41(3), 118, 108, 116, 111(3), 109(2), 500A(1), 501, 501A(2), 474(2), 474(3), 483 Migration Regulations1994 Sch 2, subclass 127 Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW)

Cases Chen v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1496 Distinguished Comcare v Fiedler (2001) 115 FCR 328 Approved Finance Facilities Pty Ltd v Commission of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (1971) 127 CLR 106 Cited Julius v Bishop of Oxford (1880) LR 5 AC 214 Approved Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Bhardwaj (2002) 209 CLR 597 Approved Minister for Immigration v Yusuf (2001) 206 CLR 323 Approved Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia (2003) 211 CLR 476 Cited R v Murray Ex parte Proctor (1949) 77 CLR 387 Cited Samad v District Court of New South Wales (2002) 209 CLR 140 Approved Ward v Williams (1955) 92 CLR 496 Approved

JONG HAK KIM, GWAN JUN KIM, HYUN JI KIM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS