Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Epeabaka

Link copied
Case Copied 27 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Epeabaka [1999] FCA 1

MIGRATION – whether Tribunal’s findings of fact disclose an error of law - whether Tribunal’s reasoning is “illogical” – whether illogicality is a ground for review under the Migration Act 1958 – standard of proof to be applied by Tribunals in making findings of fact

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 476

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321 at 357 considered
Chan v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1989) 169 CLR 379 at 413 cited
Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Guo (1997) 144 ALR 567 at 578 – 579 cited
Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Teo (1995) 57 FCR 194 at 199 – 200 cited
Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259 at 282 – 283, 293 - 294 cited
Pochi v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 ALD 33 at 41 considered
Pochi v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1980) 4 ALD 139 at 155 - 156 considered
Powley v Crimes Compensation Tribunal (1996) 11 VAR 146 at 156 – 157 considered
Roads Corporation v Dacakis [1995] 2 VR 508 at 517 – 520 considered

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS v FAUSTIN EPEABAKA

VG 19 OF 1998

JUDGES:      BLACK CJ, VON DOUSSA & CARR JJ
DATE:           6 JANUARY 1999
PLACE:         MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

VG 19 OF 1998

BETWEEN:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
APPELLANT

AND:

FAUSTIN EPEABAKA
RESPONDENT

JUDGES:

BLACK CJ, VON DOUSSA & CARR JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

6 JANUARY 1999

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

  1. The appeal be allowed.

  2. The orders made on 10 December 1997 be set aside.

  3. In lieu of the orders made on 10 December 1997, the application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal, made on 17 January 1997, be dismissed with costs.

  4. The respondent pay the costs of the appeal.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DISTRICT REGISTRY

VG 19 OF 1998

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

APPELLANT

AND:

FAUSTIN EPEABAKA

RESPONDENT

JUDGES:

BLACK CJ, VON DOUSSA & CARR JJ

DATE:

6 JANUARY 1999

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

  1. This is an appeal from the decision of a Judge of this Court, on 10 December 1997, to set aside a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal, made on 17 January 1997, that it was not satisfied that the respondent, Mr Faustin Epeabaka, was a refugee.  The Tribunal had affirmed the appellant’s decision not to grant a protection visa to the respondent.  The learned primary Judge remitted the matter to the Tribunal, to be constituted by a different member, for hearing and determination according to law.  His Honour also ordered the appellant to pay the respondent’s…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Epeabak... and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[1999] FCA 1
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Epeabaka, the central issue revolved around the correctness of the findings of fact made by the Refugee Review Tribunal, and whether such findings disclosed an error of law. The Tribunal had set aside a decision of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to cancel the visa of the applicant, a citizen of Nigeria, who was in Australia on a student visa. The Minister sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision, challenging the Tribunal's reasoning and findings of fact.

The legal issues before the court included whether the Tribunal’s findings of fact disclosed an error of law, if the Tribunal’s reasoning was illogical, and whether illogicality constituted a ground for review under the Migration Act 1958. Additionally, the court had to consider the standard of proof required by Tribunals in making findings of fact. The Minister argued that the Tribunal had failed to properly consider the material before it and had applied an incorrect standard of proof, resulting in an illogical decision.

The court held that the Tribunal's findings did disclose an error of law, as they were not supported by the material before the Tribunal and did not meet the required standard of proof. The court found that the Tribunal had indeed reasoned illogically in making its findings, which was a ground for review under the Migration Act. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the orders made by the Tribunal were set aside, and in lieu thereof, the application for review was dismissed with costs. The court also ordered that the respondent pay the costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

The appeal be allowed.

2.

The orders made on 10 December 1997 be set aside.

3.

In lieu of the orders made on 10 December 1997, the application for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal, made on 17 January 1997, be dismissed with costs.

4.

The respondent pay the costs of the appeal.

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.