Mandeep Singh v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Case [2017] HCASL 205


MANDEEP SINGH

v

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR

[2017] HCASL 205
M67/2017

  1. The application for special leave to appeal does not raise a question of general importance.  There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (North, Bromberg and Bromwich JJ).  Accordingly, an appeal to this Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

M.M. Gordon
6 September 2017
J.J. Edelman
Details
AGLC
Mandeep Singh v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] HCASL 205
Case
[2017] HCASL 205
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mandeep Singh sought to appeal a decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in relation to his application for a protection visa. The case was heard by the High Court of Australia, which considered whether special leave to appeal should be granted. The Full Court had previously dismissed Singh's application for a protection visa, which he appealed. The High Court was required to decide whether the appeal raised a question of general importance and whether there were sufficient prospects of success to warrant an appeal.

The High Court found that there was no reason to doubt the correctness of the Full Court's decision and that the appeal did not raise a question of general importance. The court held that the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. The court noted that the Full Court had carefully considered the evidence and arguments presented and had come to a reasoned decision.

The High Court found that the appeal did not raise a question of general importance and that there were insufficient grounds for the court to interfere with the Full Court's decision. The court held that the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave. Accordingly, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

The High Court directed the Registrar to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application with costs. The order was signed by Justices M.M. Gordon and J.J. Edelman on 6 September 2017. The order confirmed the dismissal of the application for special leave to appeal and the imposition of costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.