Giri v MIAC

Giri has appealed against the decision of the Federal Circuit Court, which dismissed his application for judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal. The Tribunal had determined that the Appellant had no entitlement to appear before it due to an event occurring that fell within section 359C of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The Appellant's visa was cancelled on the ground of serious crime and he applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision. The Tribunal found that he had no entitlement to appear before it by reason of section 359C(1)(a) of the Act, as the event that triggered the section had occurred.

The legal issues in this case included whether the Tribunal was correct in finding that the Appellant had no entitlement to appear before it and whether the Tribunal had the power to make such a finding. The Appellant argued that he had a right to appear before the Tribunal and that the Tribunal did not have the power to determine his entitlement to appear. The Respondent argued that the Tribunal had correctly found that the Appellant had no entitlement to appear and that it had the power to make such a finding.

The court found that the Tribunal was correct in its determination that the Appellant had no entitlement to appear before it due to the event that had occurred under section 359C(1)(a) of the Act. The court found that the Tribunal had the power to make such a finding and that the Appellant's arguments to the contrary were without merit. The court further found that the Appellant had not demonstrated that the Tribunal had made an error of law in its determination.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the First Respondent of and incidental to the appeal. The court noted that the costs were to be entered in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.