Sarkis v Migration Agents Registration Board - [1998] FCA 719

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - registration of Migration Agents - requirement that an agent be a person of integrity and a fit and proper person to give migration assistance - refusal of Migration Agents Registration Board to register the applicant on basis that these requirements not fulfilled - Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) affirmation of that decision - whether AAT’s failure to adopt a two stage procedure of allowing further submissions after AAT had made findings of fact adverse to the applicant constitutes a failure to accord natural justice - whether Board had failed to take into account matters required by statute to be taken into account.

Migration Act (1958) (Cth) ss 294(2), 295(b) and 295(d)

Smith v New South Wales Bar Association (1992) 176 CLR 256 considered and distinguished
Boucher v Australian Securities Commission (1996) 71 FCR 122 cited
Commissioner for Australian Capital Territory Revenue v Alphaone Pty Ltd (1994) 127 ALR 699 applied
Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 cited

TOUFIC LABA SARKIS v MIGRATION AGENTS REGISTRATION BOARD
NG 972 of 1997

JUDGE:  MERKEL J
PLACE:  SYDNEY
DATED:  15 JUNE 1998

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NG 972 of 1997

BETWEEN:

TOUFIC LABA SARKIS
APPLICANT

AND:

MIGRATION AGENTS REGISTRATION BOARD
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

MERKEL J

DATE OF ORDER:

15 JUNE 1998

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The application is dismissed.

The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the proceedings.

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

NG 972 of 1997

BETWEEN:

TOUFIC LABA SARKIS
APPLICANT

AND:

MIGRATION AGENTS REGISTRATION BOARD
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

MERKEL J

DATE:

15 JUNE 1998

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The applicant has appealed, pursuant to s 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“the AAT”) that the applicant is not a fit and proper person to give immigration assistance. As a consequence of that decision the applicant’s application for registration as a migration agent was required to be refused pursuant to s 294(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”).

The applicant applied for registration as a migration agent pursuant to s 288(1) of the Act. The application was referred to the Migration Agent’s Registration Board (“the Board”) pursuant to s 291. Section 294(2)(a) provides that the Board must not register the applicant as a migration agent if it is satisfied that:

“the applicant is not a person of integrity or is otherwise not a fit and proper person to give immigration assistance.”

The Board was satisfied that the applicant was “not a person of integrity or was otherwise not a fit and proper person to give immigration assistance”. The applicant sought review of the Board’s decision before the AAT.

In the hearing before the AAT the parties were represented by counsel in a hearing that took place over four days. At the conclusion…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Sarkis v Migration Agents Registration Board

Details

AGLC: Sarkis v Migration Agents Registration Board [1998] FCA 719
Case: [1998] FCA 719
Decision Date: 15 JUNE 1998

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Sarkis v Migration Agents Registration Board involved the applicant, Sarkis, contesting a decision made by the Migration Agents Registration Board to cancel his registration as a migration agent. The High Court of Australia was called upon to review the matter. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Migration Agents Registration Board had the authority to cancel Sarkis's registration under the relevant legislative framework, and if so, whether the Board's decision was lawful and justified.

The court examined the statutory provisions that govern the registration of migration agents and the powers of the Migration Agents Registration Board. It considered whether the Board's decision to cancel Sarkis's registration was within the scope of its statutory powers and whether the decision-making process adhered to the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The court also assessed whether the Board had correctly interpreted and applied the relevant legislative criteria in reaching its decision.

In its judgment, the High Court found that the Migration Agents Registration Board did have the authority to cancel Sarkis's registration, and that the Board's decision was within its statutory powers. The court determined that the Board had properly considered the statutory criteria and that its decision was not flawed by any procedural errors or failures to observe natural justice. Consequently, the court held that the Board's decision to cancel Sarkis's registration was lawful and upheld the decision of the lower court to dismiss the application. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application is dismissed.

The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the proceedings.

Note:

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.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 972 of 1997

BETWEEN:	TOUFIC LABA SARKIS APPLICANT
AND:	MIGRATION AGENTS REGISTRATION BOARD RESPONDENT
JUDGE:		MERKEL J
DATE OF ORDER:		15 JUNE 1998
WHERE MADE:		SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 972 of 1997

JUDGE:	MERKEL J
DATE:	15 JUNE 1998
PLACE:	SYDNEY