Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Tanehohaia v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 106 File number: WAD 319 of 2024
Judgment of: COLVIN J
Date of judgment: 21 February 2025
Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 501, 501BA
Cases cited: LPDT v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2024] HCA 12 Maxwell v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 47; (2016) 249 FCR 275 Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs v McQueen [2024] HCA 11 Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51; (2001) 207 CLR 391 VNPC v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 921
Division: General Division
Registry: Western Australia
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs: 8
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Solicitor for the Applicant: Estrin Saul Lawyers
Solicitor for the Respondent: MinterEllison
ORDERS WAD 319 of 2024
BETWEEN: TROY PATRICK TANEHOHAIA Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS Respondent
order made by: COLVIN J DATE OF ORDER: 21 february 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. A writ of certiorari issue quashing the decision of the Assistant Minister for Immigration made on 24 September 2024. 2. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings as agreed or taxed.
THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A. The respondent accepts that the decision of the Assistant Minister for Immigration made on 24 September 2024 is affected by jurisdictional error. On 26 July 2024, the department assisting the Assistant Minister learned that the applicant was no longer in prison. By application of Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs v McQueen [2024] HCA 11 at [17]-[20], the Assistant Minister had constructive knowledge of that fact when the decision was made on 24 September 2024. In those circumstances, the findings in the Assistant Minister's reasoning which are premised on the applicant being in prison at the time of the Assistant Minister's decision were not reasonably open to him and were made in error. Those errors were material to the Assistant Minister's decision in the sense described in LPDT v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2024] HCA 12. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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