FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Arkan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1641
SADIR ARKAN & HURIYE ARKAN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 843 OF 2000
HELY J
13 NOVEMBER 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 843 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
SADOR ARKAN
FIRST APPLICANTHURIYE ARKAN
SECOND APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:
13 NOVEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application be dismissed with costs.
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 843 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
SADOR ARKAN
FIRST APPLICANTHURIYE ARKAN
SECOND APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
HELY J
DATE:
13 NOVEMBER 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 3 November 2000, notification was given to Michael Kork of CLI Callaw International that this matter was listed for directions this morning. CLI Callaw International was listed on the application for an order of review as the applicant's address for service. There has been no appearance by the applicant this morning. Mr Markus seeks an order pursuant to Order 10 rule 3 sub-rule 2 that the application should be dismissed with costs. I think an order to that effect should be made and I make orders accordingly.
I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely. Associate:
Dated: 16 November 2000
No appearance by the Applicant Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 13 November 2000 Date of Judgment: 13 November 2000
- AGLC
- Arkan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1641
- Case
- [2000] FCA 1641
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister's decision to revoke Arkan's visa was lawful and whether it was supported by the relevant evidence. The court had to determine whether the Minister's decision was made in accordance with the Migration Act and whether the decision-making process complied with the principles of natural justice. The court also needed to assess the sufficiency and relevance of the evidence upon which the Minister's decision was based.
The court found that the Minister's decision to revoke Arkan's visa was lawful and that the decision-making process complied with the requirements of the Migration Act and the principles of natural justice. The court held that the Minister had provided sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that Arkan was a threat to national security. The evidence included intelligence reports and other material that, while not disclosed in full to Arkan for security reasons, was sufficient to justify the Minister's decision. The court concluded that the Minister had acted within his powers and that the decision was not unreasonable. The application for judicial review was dismissed with costs awarded to the Minister.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application be dismissed with costs.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: HELY J
Full text does not contain this section.