Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
CLO17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1052 Appeal from: CLO17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCCA 720
File number: NSD 480 of 2021
Judgment of: MARKOVIC J
Date of judgment: 8 September 2022
Catchwords: MIGRATION – appeal from decision of the Federal Circuit Court (as it then was) dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the first respondent to cancel the appellant's protection visa under s 109 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) because the appellant had provided incorrect information in his visa application – where appellant was granted a protection visa on the basis he was found to be homosexual with fear of persecution for that reason – where appellant later married a woman – whether the Tribunal's statement that it "appeared the [appellant] did not need to make a conscious effort to resist his sexual urges, desires and feelings" was open on the evidence – whether Tribunal's statement that the appellant "described a simple dichotomy, a choice between being gay and attracted to men in opposition to being religious and not attracted to men" could be logically reconciled with the evidence – Tribunal's findings were open – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 109
Cases cited: Applicant WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 236 FCR 593 Baker v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FCAFC 145 FSG17 v Minister for Immigration , Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (2020) 274 FCR 456 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v MZYTS (2013) 230 FCR 431 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Stretton (2016) 237 FCR 1 Plaintiff M1/2021 v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] HCA 17; 96 ALJR 497 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Appellant S20/2002 [2003] HCA 30; 77 ALJR 1165
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