FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NAJL v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 668
NAJL v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 131 of 2003ALLSOP J
2 JUNE 2003
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 131 of 2003
BETWEEN:
NAJL
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:
2 JUNE 2003
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The applicant pay the respondents costs up to and including Monday, 2 June 2003.
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
N 131 of 2003
BETWEEN:
NAJL
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE:
2 JUNE 2003
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter the applicant, or someone on behalf of the applicant sent a facsimile to the Court on 31 May 2003, which was a Saturday, being a notice of discontinuance. The facsimile transmission indicates that the sender was a Keith W. Murray, a name which I am not aware as being either a migration agent or solicitor. In any event, there appears to have been a notice of discontinuance filed on behalf of the applicant signed in Chinese characters.
The notice of discontinuance has in its form the publication name of the applicant as NAFL, however the correct court number is given (N131 of 2003) and the correct name of the applicant is given in Roman script, being three words, the first beginning with C, the second beginning with T and the third beginning with H. In these circumstances I am content to work on the facsimile of the notice of discontinuance. Under the rules the respondent is entitled to his costs. If the rules don't automatically provide for it, I would order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs up to and including Monday, 2 June and 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 Allsop. Associate:
Dated: 3 June 2003
No appearance by the Applicant: Counsel for the Respondent: Mr S Lloyd Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 2 June 2003 Date of Judgment: 2 June 2003
- AGLC
- NAJL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 668
- Case
- [2003] FCA 668
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the Minister's decision was lawful and whether there were any errors of law in the decision-making process. The court had to determine if the Minister's decision was reasonable and if the applicant's rights under the Migration Act were respected. Additionally, the court needed to assess if there were any procedural errors in the decision-making process that warranted setting the decision aside.
The court examined the Minister's decision and the applicable legal framework, finding that the Minister's decision was based on a correct interpretation of the law. The court concluded that the decision was lawful and that there were no errors of law. The applicant's rights under the Migration Act were not violated, and the Minister's decision was reasonable. The court held that the applicant's arguments did not establish any grounds for setting the decision aside, and the Minister's decision was upheld. Consequently, the court dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The applicant pay the respondents costs up to and including Monday, 2 June 2003.
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: ALLSOP J
Full text does not contain this section.