Marya v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs

The matter before the Court was an interlocutory application filed by Mr Marya, an Indian national in immigration detention, seeking to prevent his removal from Australia. Mr Marya, who had been in detention since July 2018, had unsuccessfully sought various visas and was scheduled for removal on 5 May 2023. The application was dismissed on the evening of 4 May 2023 by the duty judge. The primary legal issues were whether Mr Marya had established a prima facie case for relief and whether the balance of convenience weighed in favour of granting injunctive relief.

The Court considered the material before it, including affidavits from Mr Marya and the Minister’s instructing solicitor, and concluded that Mr Marya had not established a prima facie case for relief. The Court found that Mr Marya's claims did not meet the threshold for interlocutory relief as he had no unresolved visa application or review proceedings. Additionally, the Court noted that Mr Marya had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the balance of convenience favoured granting the relief. The Court also considered Mr Marya's arguments regarding alleged procedural failings by the Department of Immigration, which were deemed insufficient to warrant intervention at this stage.

In light of the above, the Court dismissed the application and ordered that Mr Marya pay the Minister's costs of the application, to be taxed if not agreed. This decision underscores the rigorous standards required to obtain interlocutory relief in removal cases, emphasising the need for a strong prima facie case and a favourable balance of convenience. The dismissal reflects the Court's adherence to procedural fairness and the importance of adhering to the established legal framework.