Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
EFM19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 1609 Appeal from: Application for leave to appeal: EFM19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FedCFamC2G 321
File number: QUD 441 of 2021
Judgment of: THOMAS J
Date of judgment: 15 December 2023
Catchwords: MIGRATION – offshore visa cancellation without notice under s 128 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – where the appellant provided incorrect information in support of previous visa application – facial recognition software identified inconsistency – where appellant alleges cancellation deliberately delayed until the appellant was offshore so as not to give notice of intention to cancel visa – where appellant sought copies of unredacted document relating to the facial recognition software – leave to appeal refused
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Magistrates Act 1999 (Cth) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
Cases cited: Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings Limited v BlueScope Steel Limited [2010] FCA 739 Commissioner of Police, New South Wales v Guo (2016) 332 ALR 236; [2016] FCAFC 62 Decor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Devine Marine Group Pty Ltd v Fair Work Ombudsman [2013] FCA 442 EFM19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FedCFamC2G 321 Esso Australia Resources Limited v Commissioner Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (1999) 201 CLR 49; [1999] HCA 67 Gloucester Shire Council v Fitch Ratings, Inc [2016] FCA 587 Goodwin v HBCA Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 166 Gypsy Jokers Motorcycle Club Incorporated v The Commissioner of Police (2008) 234 CLR 532; [2008] HCA 4 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Housing Commission of New South Wales v Tatmar Pastoral Co Pty Ltd [1983] 3 NSWLR 378 Jess v Cooloola Milk Pty Ltd (2022) 292 FCR 284; [2022] FCAFC 75 Kanthal Australia Pty Ltd v Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce (1987) 14 FCR 90 Lift Shop Pty Ltd v Next Level Elevators Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC2G 268 Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1; [1999] HCA 66 Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Ltd (2017) 252 FCR 1; [2017] FCAFC 98 Nationwide News Pty Limited v Rush [2018] FCAFC 70 NSW Commissioner of Police v Tuxford & Ors [2002] NSWCA 139 Rawson Finances Pty Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (2010) 81 ATR 36; [2010] FCAFC 139 Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 15) [2021] FCA 582 Russel v Macquarie Bank Limited [2020] FCA 1332 SZUJT v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 612 The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Shaw [2023] FCA 298 Tyco Australia Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (2005) 142 FCR 428; [2005] FCAFC 115 Wong v Sklavos (2014) 319 ALR 378; [2014] FCAFC 120
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