High Court of Australia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
RE THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ORS EX PARTE RADOJICIC
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered at Sydney on Friday 21 January 2000
RE THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ORS; EX PARTE RADOJICIC
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT McHUGH J
21 JANUARY 2000
RE THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA; EX PARTE RADOJICIC
ORDER
1. Application dismissed with costs.
2. Certify for counsel.
RE THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ORS; EX PARTE RADOJICIC
The applicant seeks orders nisi in respect of three prerogative writs. The first order nisi is directed to The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ("The Minister") calling on him to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not issue out of this Court prohibiting him from proceeding further or acting upon a decision of the second respondent, described as "John Godfrey sitting as the Refugee Review Tribunal", made on 30 March 1999. That decision determined that the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal") had no jurisdiction to review a decision of a delegate of the Minister who had held that the applicant was not a refugee. The second order nisi is directed to the third respondent, described as "John Godfrey in his capacity as acting Principal Member of the Refugee Review
Tribunal", calling upon him to show cause why a writ of certiorari
1 As has been pointed out more than once in this and other Courts, where a prerogative writ is sought against an order of a tribunal or public official, the respondent should be the tribunal or
ublic office, not the person who constituted the tribunal or held he office at the time that the order was made. That is because the order is the order of the tribunal or public office, not the order of the person who constituted the tribunal or happened to hold the public office at that time. When the order is directed to the tribunal or public office, any person or persons constituting the tribunal or holding the public office at any relevant time must give effect to the prerogative writ. See eg Tapping on the High
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