Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ACN16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 399 Appeal from: ACN16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2018] FCCA 2969
File number VID 1426 of 2018
Judge: MIDDLETON J
Date of judgment: 28 February 2019
Date of publication of reasons 20 March 2019
Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
Cases cited: Minister for Immigration & Citizenship v SZGUR (2011) 241 CLR 594
Date of hearing: 28 February 2019
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category: No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 26
Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant appeared in person with the assistance of an interpreter
Counsel for the First Respondent: Mr C McDermott
Solicitor for the First Respondent: Clayton Utz
Solicitor for the Second Respondent: The Second Respondent filed a submitting notice
ORDERS VID 1426 of 2018
BETWEEN: ACN16 Appellant
AND: MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS First Respondent
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
JUDGE: MIDDLETON J DATE OF ORDER: 28 FEBRUARY 2019
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The Appellant pay the costs of the First Respondent to be taxed in default of agreement. 3. The First Respondent's name be changed to "Minister for Home Affairs". Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MIDDLETON J:
INTRODUCTION 1 On 28 February 2019, the Court ordered that: (1) The appeal be dismissed. (2) The Appellant pay the costs of the First Respondent to be taxed in default of agreement. (3) The First Respondent's name be changed to "Minister for Home Affairs". 2 These are the reasons for the making of the orders. 3 By Notice of Appeal dated 8 November 2018, the Appellant seeks to appeal from the whole of the judgment of the Federal Circuit Court (the 'FCC') delivered on 24 October 2018 in which the FCC dismissed the Appellant's application for judicial review of a decision of the Second Respondent (the 'Tribunal') which had affirmed a decision of a delegate of the First Respondent (the 'Minister') not to grant the Appellant a Protection Visa.
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