Le v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2010] FCA 1260

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Le v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1260

Citation:		Le v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1260
Appeal from:		Le v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2010] FMCA 648
Parties:		VIET HA LE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP and MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
File number:		VID 736 of 2010
Judge:		MARSHALL J
Date of judgment:		17 November 2010
Cases cited:		Ong v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1259
Date of hearing:	17 November 2010
Place:	Melbourne
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	4
The Appellant appeared in person, assisted by Mr Ong
Counsel for the First Respondent:	Ms Catherine L Symons
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	DLA Phillips Fox

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	VID 736 of 2010

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

VIET HA LE
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MARSHALL J
DATE OF ORDER:	17 NOVEMBER 2010
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Leave is given to extend the time within which to serve the notice of appeal, to 26 August 2011.

2.The appeal is dismissed.

3.The appellant pay the first respondent’s costs of the appeal, to be taxed in default of agreement.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	VID 736 of 2010

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

VIET HA LE
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MARSHALL J
DATE:	17 NOVEMBER 2010
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The issues which arise in this matter are materially identical to the issues addressed in Ong v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1259 which was heard and determined immediately prior to the hearing in this matter.

2. For the reasons given in Ong the same orders will be made in this matter as in Ong.

3. The factual circumstances relevant to this matter do not vary from those in Ong in any relevant respect. The Tribunal officer who refused the fee waiver application considered the material placed before him by the appellant but declined to grant that application.

4. The Tribunal determined correctly that it had no jurisdiction to entertain a review of the decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister to refuse the appellant a Temporary Business Entry visa. The Court below determined correctly that the Tribunal had no power to hear a review of the delegate’s decision in the absence of a fee waiver or the payment of the prescribed fee. The appeal is without merit and must be dismissed. For the reasons referred to in Ong at [14], the appellant is granted an extension of time within which to serve the appeal.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Marshall.

Associate:

Dated:        18 November 2010