FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
CCA19 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 939
File number: VID 552 of 2019 Judge: BROMBERG J Date of judgment: 13 June 2019 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory injunction to remove the applicant from Nauru so that he can receive appropriate mental health treatment – where interlocutory relief granted that required the respondent to take all reasonable steps to transfer the applicant and his uncle from Nauru to a place where he can receive urgent medical attention – where applicant still on Nauru – where issues raised as to the Court’s jurisdiction to hear such matters – whether the Court should make further and more specific orders to give effect to the orders previously made for interlocutory relief. Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 494AB Cases cited: Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 199
AWB Ltd v Honourable Terence Rhoderic Hudson Cole (No 4) [2006] FCA 1050
AYX18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 283
BAF18 as litigation representative for BAG18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1060
BKP19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2019] FCA 761
CDO19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 890
D7 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2016) 244 FCR 1
DCQ18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 918
DJA18 as litigation representative for DIZ18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1050
DRB18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1163
EHW18 v Minister for Home Affairs (2018) 262 FCR 27
ELF18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1368
Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia (1998) 195 CLR 1
Plaintiff S99/2016 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2016) 243 FCR 17
R v Ross-Jones; Ex parte Green (1984) 156 CLR 185
Romaldi Constructions Pty Ltd v Adelaide Interior Linings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] SASCFC 124
Date of hearing: 13 June 2019 Registry: Victoria Division: General Division National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Category: Catchwords Number of paragraphs: 67 Counsel for the Applicant: Ms E Bennett with Mr J Hartley Solicitor for the Applicant: Lander & Rogers Lawyers Counsel for the Respondents: Mr A Yuile Solicitor for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitor ORDERS
VID 552 of 2019 BETWEEN: CCA19
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS
First Respondent
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
BROMBERG J
DATE OF ORDER:
13 JUNE 2019
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.As soon as reasonably practicable and within 72 hours the Respondents take the following steps:
(a)seek, whether by the Respondents’ officers, servants, agents, contractors or otherwise, to have the Applicant’s case considered by the Overseas Medical Referral Committee
(i)on the basis of an assessment which draws to the Committee’s attention the conclusions and recommendations in the reports of Dr Dudley and Dr Manovel; and
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read CCA19 v Minister for Home Affairs and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] FCA 939
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were twofold: first, whether the court had the jurisdiction to hear such matters; and second, whether the court should make further and more specific orders to enforce the previously made interlocutory relief. The applicant argued that the court had jurisdiction to hear the matter, and that the respondent had not taken sufficient steps to comply with the previous orders. The respondent, on the other hand, contended that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear such matters and that the applicant’s claims were unfounded.
The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter, finding that the applicant’s claims fell within the court’s remit as they related to the provision of medical care. The court also found that the respondent had not taken sufficient steps to comply with the previous orders. The court ordered that the respondent take specific steps to ensure the applicant’s transfer from Nauru, including seeking consideration of the applicant’s case by the Overseas Medical Referral Committee and making an application to the Nauruan Ministry of Health and/or the Nauruan Ministry of Multicultural Affairs. The court further adjourned the interlocutory application to allow for the respondent to take these steps.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. As soon as reasonably practicable and within 72 hours the Respondents take the following steps:
(a) seek, whether by the Respondents’ officers, servants, agents, contractors or otherwise, to have the Applicant’s case considered by the Overseas Medical Referral Committee
(i) on the basis of an assessment which draws to the Committee’s attention the conclusions and recommendations in the reports of Dr Dudley and Dr Manovel; and
(ii) on the basis of expanding the approval given to the Applicant on 2 May 2019 to travel to Taiwan so that it also covers travel to Australia.
(b) make an application to the Nauruan Ministry of Health and/or the Nauruan Ministry of Multicultural Affairs to have the Overseas Medical Panel Referral Process dispensed with or to secure uplift approval for the evacuation of the Applicant of the kind referred to at paragraph 13 of the affidavit of Peter Lawrence Timson of 3 June 2019.
2. The Applicants’ interlocutory application be adjourned to 9:30am on 18 June 2019.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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
Full text does not contain this section.