Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Fehoko v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1471 Appeal from: Review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 4 January 2022
File number: QUD 41 of 2022
Judgment of: RANGIAH J
Date of judgment: 9 December 2022
Catchwords: MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of non-revocation decision – whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal failed to give proper, genuine and realistic consideration to the applicant's claim that removal would cause the applicant to suffer psychological harm – whether the Tribunal misapplied Ministerial Direction 90 – where Tribunal erred by overlooking consideration of whether claim affected decision – Tribunal's decision set aside
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 43 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 476A(1), 499, 500(1)(ba), 501(3A), 501CA(4)
Cases cited: Applicant WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 236 FCR 593 Dranichnikov v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] HCA 26; (2003) 77 ALJR 1088 FYBR v Minister for Home Affairs (2019) 272 FCR 454 KXXH v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCAFC 111 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA (2019) 264 CLR 421 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Tesic (2017) 251 FCR 23 MZAPC v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2021] HCA 17; (2021) 95 ALJR 441 Nathanson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] HCA 26; (2022) 96 ALJR 737 Plaintiff M1/2021 v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] HCA 17; (2022) 96 ALJR 497 Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth (2010) 243 CLR 319
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