FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Kaewbunruang v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000]
FCA 170RAMPHAI KAEWBUNRUANG v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 1219 of 1999
HELY J
18 FEBRUARY 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1219 OF 1999
BETWEEN:
RAMPHAI KAEWBUNRUANG
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:
18 FEBRUARY 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The proceedings 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 1219 OF 1999
BETWEEN:
RAMPHAI KAEWBUNRUANG
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE:
18 FEBRUARY 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The history of this matter appears from an affidavit of Ms Nanson of 16 February 2000. The applicant has not appeared on the last two occasions when the matter has been before the Court for directions. In those circumstances, I think it appropriate to order that the proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Order 10 rule 3 and the order which I make is that the proceedings be dismissed with costs.
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: 25 February 2000
Applicant: No appearance by the applicant Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 18 February 2000 Date of Judgment: 18 February 2000
- AGLC
- Kaewbunruang v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 170
- Case
- [2000] FCA 170
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether the Minister's decision to cancel the visa and order removal was legally sound, and if there were any procedural irregularities that warranted judicial intervention. Specifically, the court had to determine if the Minister acted within the bounds of the Migration Act and if the individual's rights under the Act and common law were respected. Additionally, the court examined whether the decision-making process adhered to the principles of natural justice.
In delivering its judgment, the court found that the Minister's decision was both lawful and procedurally correct. It determined that all statutory requirements had been met and that the individual's rights were adequately protected. The court also held that the decision-making process complied with the principles of natural justice, finding no evidence of bias or procedural unfairness. Consequently, the court dismissed the proceedings and ordered the individual to pay the costs associated with the litigation.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The proceedings 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.