FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NADM v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs
FCA [2002] 642NADM v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N156 of 2002WILCOX J
14 MAY 2002
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N156 of 2002
BETWEEN:
NADM
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE OF ORDER:
14 MAY 2002
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the costs of the respondent.
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
N156 of 2002
BETWEEN:
NADM
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE:
14 MAY 2002
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
WILCOX J:
This matter was before the Court for directions on 12 April last. On that occasion the applicant attended with an interpreter. The matter was fixed for hearing at 2.15 today. I explained to the applicant that the matter would definitely proceed at that time and that he must be here. He has not attended. An interpreter is here but not the applicant. Nothing has been heard from the applicant either by the solicitors for the respondent or by the Court. I can only assume he has lost interest in the matter.
Mr Justin Smith, counsel for the respondent, asks that in the circumstances I make an order dismissing the application for review with costs. I think this is the appropriate course for me to take. Accordingly, I so order.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Wilcox. Associate:
Dated: 25 May 2002
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Smith Solicitor for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore Date of Hearing: 14 May 2002
- AGLC
- NADM v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 642
- Case
- [2002] FCA 642
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Minister's decision to detain NADM was in accordance with the Migration Act and whether the detention complied with the procedural fairness requirements under the Constitution. NADM argued that the Minister's decision to detain was unlawful as it was based on insufficient evidence and without proper consideration of their individual circumstances. The Minister, on the other hand, maintained that the detention was justified under the provisions of the Act and was necessary for the protection of the public interest.
The court found that the Minister's decision to detain NADM was in accordance with the Migration Act, and that the procedural fairness requirements were met. The court held that the Minister had acted within their statutory powers and that the decision to detain NADM was supported by sufficient evidence. The court also found that NADM's rights under the Constitution had not been violated, as the detention was justified and proportionate to the circumstances. Consequently, the court dismissed the application and ordered NADM to pay the costs of the respondent.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the costs of the respondent.
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: WILCOX J
Full text does not contain this section.