Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
QJYD v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCA 962 Review from: QJYD and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Migration) [2021] AATA 1
File number: WAD 17 of 2021
Judgment of: MCKERRACHER J
Date of judgment: 16 August 2021
Catchwords: MIGRATION – judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming the delegate's decision not to revoke a cancellation decision – whether the Tribunal's state of satisfaction that there was not 'another reason' to revoke the cancellation decision was vitiated by the its misunderstanding of certain evidence concerning the likelihood of reoffending – where Tribunal's purported misunderstanding demonstrated by new material adduced that was not before the Tribunal MIGRATION – whether the non-exercise of the Tribunal's discretion to obtain further information in relation to certain evidence was legally unreasonable – whether the Tribunal failed to make an obvious inquiry regarding a critical fact that was readily ascertainable
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ss 33(1)(c), 43(2B) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 473DC, 476A, 499, 499(1), 499(2A), 501(3A), 501CA(3)(b), 501CA(4), 501CA(4)(a), 501CA(4)(b), 501CA(4)(b)(i), 501CA(4)(b)(ii)
Cases cited: Ali v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 109; (2020) 278 FCR 627 Avon Downs Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) [1949] HCA 26; (1949) 78 CLR 353 BVD17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] HCA 34; (2019) 268 CLR 29 EAT17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2021] FCA 68 EHF17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1681; (2019) 272 FCR 409 Guclukol v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 148 Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 184; (2017) 256 FCR 235 Matthews v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 146 Minister for Home Affairs v Buadromo [2018] FCAFC 151; (2018) 267 FCR 320 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v CRY16 [2017] FCAFC 210; (2017) 253 FCR 475 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Maioha [2018] FCAFC 216; (2018) 267 FCR 643 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v MZYTS [2013] FCAFC 114; (2013) 230 FCR 431 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li [2013] HCA 18; (2013) 249 CLR 332 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZIAI [2009] HCA 39; (2009) 83 ALJR 1123 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZGUR [2011] HCA 1; (2011) 241 CLR 594 Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang [1996] HCA 6: (1996) 185 CLR 259 Navoto v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCAFC 135 PQSM v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 125; (2020) 279 FCR 175 Taualii v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 2013 Tohi v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCAFC 125
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