NAWE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Case [2004] FCA 350


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAWE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 350

NAWE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 1487 of 2003

ALLSOP J
24 FEBRUARY 2004
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 1487 of 2003

BETWEEN:

NAWE
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER:

24 FEBRUARY 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent's costs.

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 1487 of 2003

BETWEEN:

NAWE
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

ALLSOP J

DATE:

24 FEBRUARY 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. In this matter the applicant has not appeared today on the second directions hearing.  He has previously not appeared at a directions hearing.  I am satisfied in the affidavit of Ishan Muthalib sworn 24 February 2004, being the solicitor at Blake Dawson Waldron handling the matter, that the applicant is aware of today's directions hearing. 

  2. In those circumstances I dismiss the application under Order 10 Rule 3 of the Federal Court Rules and I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs. 

  3. It should be noted that I have had the matter called three times outside the Court room using the acronym NAWE. Assuming as I must, in the absence of argument that s 91X of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) is constitutionally valid, I must obey it, notwithstanding the apparent absurdity of calling someone outside by an acronym.

  4. The orders of Court are the application be dismissed and the applicant pay the respondent's costs.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop.

Associate:

Dated:            13 April 2004

Solicitor for the Respondent: Blake Dawson Waldron
Date of Hearing: 24 February 2004
Date of Judgment: 24 February 2004
Details
AGLC
NAWE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 350
Case
[2004] FCA 350
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, NAWE, a non-citizen, applied to the Federal Court for a review of the respondent Minister's decision to cancel their visa on the basis of character grounds. The Court was required to assess the legality and merits of the decision made by the Minister. The primary focus was on whether the Minister's decision to cancel the visa was lawful and whether the evidence supported the Minister's findings.

The legal issues before the Court included the scope of judicial review in decisions made by the Minister under the Migration Act, the application of relevant statutory provisions, and the standard of proof required to justify the Minister's decision. The Court examined whether the decision was made within the Minister's legal authority, whether the process was fair, and whether the decision was supported by relevant evidence.

The Court found that the Minister's decision was within their statutory authority and was based on sufficient evidence. The Court held that the Minister's decision was lawful as it was made in accordance with the Migration Act and was supported by the requisite level of proof. The Court also determined that the procedural fairness was upheld, as the applicant had adequate opportunity to respond to the allegations. The Court therefore dismissed the application and ordered that the applicant pay the respondent's costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs.

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

ALLSOP J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: ALLSOP J

Full text does not contain this section.