Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Snyman [2016] FCA 242 Appeal from: Snyman & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 2791
File number: NSD 1363 of 2015
Judge: BARKER J
Date of judgment: 11 March 2016
Catchwords: MIGRATION – application for business skills (residence) (class DF) subclass 892 visas – appeal from Federal Circuit Court – whether Tribunal considered relevant evidence – whether Tribunal erred by asking whether company operated "one main business" rather than "a main business" for the purposes of reg 1.11 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – whether Tribunal misconstrued reg 1.11(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – appeal allowed
Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 134(10), s 351 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) reg 1.03, reg 1.11, reg 1.11(1)(a), reg 1.11(1)(d), reg 1.11(2), Sch 2 cl 892.211, cl 892.212, cl 892.212(a), cl 892.212(b), cl 892.212(c), cl 892.212(c)(ii), cl 892.213, cl 892.213(a), cl 892.213(b) Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) Sch 1
Cases cited: Nassif v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 129 FCR 448; [2003] FCA 481 Snyman & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 2791 SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2013) 212 FCR 235; [2013] FCAFC 71
Date of hearing: 11 February 2016
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