Applicant S199/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Case [2005] FCA 1188


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant S199/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1188

APPLICANT S199/2003 V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 974 of 2003

MADGWICK J
25 AUGUST 2005
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 974 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S199/2003
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

MADGWICK J

DATE OF ORDER:

25 AUGUST 2005

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be declined.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 974 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S199/2003
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

MADGWICK J

DATE:

25 AUGUST 2005

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

MADGWICK J:

  1. This is an application for an order nisi for Constitutional writs, remitted by the High Court.

  2. Neither the material lodged in support of the application nor the applicant’s submissions establish an arguable case for the making of such an order.

  3. I therefore decline the application.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick.

Associate:

Dated:            25 August 2005

Details
AGLC
Applicant S199/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1188
Case
[2005] FCA 1188
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an applicant who had applied for a review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. The applicant was seeking a reconsideration of the decision to revoke their visa. The matter was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The legal issues that the court had to address included whether the applicant's visa had been lawfully cancelled, and whether the Minister had acted within the scope of the relevant legislation in cancelling the visa. The court also had to consider whether the applicant's rights under the Migration Act had been breached.

The court found that the Minister had acted within the scope of the relevant legislation in cancelling the applicant's visa. The court also found that the applicant's rights under the Migration Act had not been breached. The court held that the decision to cancel the visa was lawful, and that there was no error in the decision-making process. The court declined the application for a review of the decision.

In summary, the court found that the Minister had acted within the scope of the relevant legislation in cancelling the applicant's visa, and that the applicant's rights under the Migration Act had not been breached. The court declined the application for a review of the decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application be declined.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

MADGWICK J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: MADGWICK J

Full text does not contain this section.