Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Kennedy v Australian Fisheries Management Authority [2009] FCA 1485
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – appeal from a decision of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority to grant certain statutory fishing rights – granting certain statutory fishing rights pursuant to s 26 of the Western Tuna Billfish Fishery Management Plan 2005 – whether notice of appeal contained pure questions of law – whether the Court may frame its own questions of law based on notice of appeal – whether reasons given by the Statutory Fishing Rights Allocation Review Panel (SFRARP) were adequate – whether the SFRARP complied with its statutory obligation to give reasons – whether a failure to give reasons for an administrative decision vitiates the making of that decision – whether a failure to give reasons for an administrative decision can constitute an error of law
Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) ss 15AA, 25D Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ss 43(2), 44, 44(1) Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) s 5 Fisheries Management Act 2001 (Cth) ss 4, 21(1)(a), 21(1)(b), 21(1)(c), 21(1)(d), 21(2)(a), 21(5)(b), 23(3)(b), 42, 95, 124, 142, 144, 144(3), 150(2), 160(1)(b), 161, 161(4) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 430, 501G, 501G(4) Western Tuna and Billfish Fishery Management Plan 2005 ss 11, 15, 20, 20A, 24, 26, 27, 27(1)(a), 27(1)(b), 27(1)(c), 27(1)(d)
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Saxby Bridge Financial Planning Pty Ltd (2003) 133 FCR 290, cited Australian Telecommunications Corporation v Lambroglou (1990) 12 AAR 515, cited Australian Trade Commission v Underwood Exports Pty Ltd (1997) 49 ALD 411, referred to Birdseye v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2003) 76 ALD 321, applied Civil Aviation Safety Authority v Central Aviation Pty Ltd (2009) 108 ALD 329, referred to Civil Aviation Safety Authority v Central Aviation Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 137, applied Comcare v Etheridge (2006) 149 FCR 522, cited Comcare v Lees (1997) 151 ALR 647, considered Commissioner of Taxation v Dixon (2006) 155 FCR 101, cited Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Proprietary Limited v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (1981) 147 CLR 297, referred to Director-General of Social Services v Chaney (1980) 47 FLR 80, cited Dornan v Riordan (1990) 24 FCR 564, considered Finance Facilities Pty Limited v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (1971) 127 CLR 106, referred to Hill v Repatriation Commission (2004) 207 ALR 470, cited Hussain v Minister for Foreign Affairs (2008) 169 FCR 241, cited Julius v Lord Bishop of Oxford (1880) 5 App Cas 214, considered K. & S. Lake City Freighters Proprietary Limited v Gordon & Gotch Limited (1985) 157 CLR 309, referred to Leach v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 1, cited Metropolitan Coal Company of Sydney Limited, The v The Australian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation (1917) 24 CLR 85, cited Mills v Meeking (1990) 169 CLR 214, referred to Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teo (1995) 57 FCR 194, referred to Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf (2001) 206 CLR 323, considered Minister for Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; ex parte Palme, Re (2003) 216 CLR 212, applied Mountview Court Properties Ltd v Devlin (1970) 21 P & CR 689, referred to Muralidharan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 62 FCR 402, referred to Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] AC 997, referred to Pettitt v Dunkley [1971] 1 NSWLR 376, referred to Preston v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services (2004) 39 AAR 177, referred to Repatriation Commission v O'Brien (1985) 155 CLR 422, considered State Electricity Commission v Commissioner for Equal Opportunity [1992] 1 VR 79, cited Stuart v Kirland-Veenstra (2009) 254 ALR 432, referred to TNT Skypak International (Aust) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1988) 82 ALR 175, cited United Firefighters Union, Re (1969) 129 CAR 43, referred to Wentworth Securities Ltd v Jones [1980] AC 74, referred to
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