Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NAXN v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 162 NAXN & ORS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N 1839 of 2003 ALLSOP J 5 MARCH 2004 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1839 of 2003
BETWEEN: NAXN
FIRST APPLICANT
NAXO
SECOND APPLICANT
NAXP
THIRD APPLICANT
NAXQ
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER: 5 MARCH 2004
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The first and second applicants 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
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1839 of 2003
BETWEEN: NAXN
FIRST APPLICANT
NAXO
SECOND APPLICANT
NAXP
THIRD APPLICANT
NAXQ
FOURTH APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: ALLSOP J
DATE: 5 MARCH 2004
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 11 February 2004, I made orders that this matter stand over to 25 February 2004 to allow the parties to consider their position in relation to a question arising under or involving the interpretation of the Constitution. On the same day I handed down reasons which, subject to any constitutional question, dealt with all arguments put on behalf of the applicants in respect of their claim for relief under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal which had affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister to refuse protection visas to the applicants. 2 Shortly prior to 25 February 2004, the solicitor for the applicants indicated to my chambers that there was to be no constitutional question taken. With that intimation it is plain that I have now dealt with all relevant matters. 3 In the above circumstances, the application of the applicants will be dismissed. 4 The applicants are a family. The application was brought by husband and wife on behalf of themselves and their children. I do not propose to make an order for costs against the children. 5 The orders of the Court are: 1. the application be dismissed; 2. the first and second applicants pay the respondent's costs. I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop.
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