S382 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
S382 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 504
S382 OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS & ORS
N 2535 OF 2003
EMMETT J
9 FEBRUARY 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N 2535 OF 2003

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

S382 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENT

PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENT

KIM ROSSER, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

9 FEBRUARY 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.        the application for an order nisi be refused;
2.        the applicant pay the Minister’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 2535 OF 2003

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

S382 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENT

PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

KIM ROSSER, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE:

9 FEBRUARY 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 30 June 2003, the applicant filed in the High Court a draft order nisi and an affidavit sworn on 25 June 2003. The order nisi claimed prerogative relief in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) made on 1 June 2000 affirming a decision not to grant a protection visa to the applicant and members of his family. The affidavit in support of the draft order nisi disclosed no basis upon which any prerogative relief could be granted. On 12 November 2003, the matter was remitted to this Court by Heydon J.
When the matter was called on for directions today there was no appearance for the applicant. In the circumstances I propose to refuse an order nisi. I order the applicant to pay the Minister’s costs.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.
Associate:
Dated: 27 April 2004

Counsel for the Applicant: The applicant did not appear

Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

Date of Hearing: 9 February 2004

Date of Judgment: 9 February 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the applicant, identified as S382 of 2003, who applied for a judicial review of a decision made by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. The dispute centred around the merits of the decision to revoke the applicant's visa and to order his deportation from Australia. The matter was heard and determined by the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issues the court had to address were whether the Minister's decision to revoke the visa and order deportation was lawful and whether there were any errors in the process that led to the decision. This involved examining the legislative framework governing visa revocation and deportation, as well as the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The court needed to determine if the Minister's decision was made in accordance with the law and if the applicant's rights were properly considered.

The court found that the Minister's decision was lawful and that there were no errors in the process that would warrant judicial intervention. The court held that the Minister had followed the correct procedures and that the decision was supported by appropriate evidence. The applicant's arguments regarding procedural fairness were also rejected as the court found that the process adhered to the necessary legal standards. Consequently, the application for an order nisi was refused, and the applicant was ordered to pay the Minister's costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 2535 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	S382 OF 2003 APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS FIRST RESPONDENT PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL SECOND RESPONDENT KIM ROSSER, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	9 FEBRUARY 2004
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

Counsel for the Applicant:	The applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	9 February 2004
Date of Judgment:	9 February 2004