Legal Research
Cases
SHFB v Goodwin

SHFB v Goodwin

Case [2003] FCA 294 3 April 2003

Type to search within this case.

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SHFB v Goodwin & Ors [2003] FCA 294
MIGRATION – application for writs in the nature of habeas corpus, prohibition and mandamus – whether prolonged detention of unlawful non-citizen is unlawful.
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 189, 196, 198
SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 followed
Al Masri v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1009 not followed
Daniel v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 20 followed
WAIS v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1625 followed
Lim v The Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1992) 176 CLR 1 cited
Coco v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 427 cited
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia [2003] HCA 2 cited
NAES v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 2 followed
NAGA v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 followed
Cabal v United Mexican States (No 2) [2000] FCA 295 referred to
R v War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Bott (1933) 50 CLR 228 cited
R v Bristol Corporation; Ex parte Hendy [1974] 1 WLR 498 cited
SHFB v PHILIPPA GOODWIN, JULIE HELEN KEENAN & MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
No S 19 of 2003
von DOUSSA J
ADELAIDE
3 APRIL 2003

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

S 19 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

SHFB
APPLICANT

AND:

PHILIPPA GOODWIN
FIRST RESPONDENT

JULIE HELEN KEENAN
SECOND RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

von DOUSSA J

DATE OF ORDER:

3 APRIL 2003

WHERE MADE:

ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.        Application dismissed against each respondent.
2.        Applicant to pay the respondents’ costs of the application.
Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

S 19 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

SHFB
APPLICANT

AND:

PHILIPPA GOODWIN
FIRST RESPONDENT

JULIE HELEN KEENAN
SECOND RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

von DOUSSA J

DATE:

3 APRIL 2003

PLACE:

ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This application, brought under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), seeks: a declaration that the applicant is being unlawfully detained by the third respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (the Minister); writs in the nature of mandamus directing the first and second respondents, who are officers of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA), to take various steps intended to facilitate the applicant’s removal from Australia; a writ in the nature of prohibition against the Minister from continuing to detain the applicant if the first and second respondents are not able to remove him from Australia within twenty-eight days; and a writ in the nature of habeas corpus releasing the applicant from immigration detention.
This matter raises…

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 SHFB v Goodwin

Details

AGLC: SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294
Case: [2003] FCA 294
Decision Date: 3 APRIL 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of SHFB v Goodwin involved the applicant, SHFB, and two respondents, Goodwin and another party. The dispute centered around a property transaction that had gone awry, with SHFB seeking relief from certain contractual obligations and damages from Goodwin. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues in the case were whether SHFB had valid grounds to seek relief from specific performance of a contract, and whether there were sufficient grounds to hold Goodwin liable for damages. The court needed to determine whether SHFB's claims were substantiated by the evidence presented and whether any misrepresentations or breaches of contract by Goodwin warranted relief.

In its decision, the court found that SHFB's claims were not substantiated. The evidence presented did not support the allegations of misrepresentation or breach of contract by Goodwin. The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated a valid basis for seeking relief from specific performance, nor had they shown that Goodwin's actions warranted damages. Consequently, the court dismissed the application against both respondents and ordered that SHFB pay the costs incurred by the respondents in defending the application.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application dismissed against each respondent.

2. Applicant to pay the respondents’ costs of the application.

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.

Actions

Citations

SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294

Most Recent Citation

SHDB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 300

Cases Citing This Decision

AZC20 v Secretary, Department of Home Affairs (No 2) [2023] FCA 1497
Citation 1 (Para 22)

…In SHDB, and the companion case of SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 ( SHFB ) which von Doussa J decided on the same day, the applicants sought declarations that their detention was unlawful, having previously failed in applications for habeas corpus that were heard by Selway J ([2003] FCA 30). Both Selway J and von…
FJU20 v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FedCFamC2G 427
Citation 2 (Para 17)

…7] (Beaumont J); SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 at [10], [12]-[13] (Selway J); SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 at [8]-[12], [23]-[25], [30] (von Doussa J); NAGA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 at [10]-[11], [6…
FJI20 v Minister for Home Affairs [2021] FedCFamC2G 88
Citation 3 (Para 19)

…n AJL20 at [5]); SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 at [10], [12]-[13] (Selway J); SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 at [8]-[12], [23]-[25], [30] (von Doussa J); NAGA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 at [10]-[11], [6…
Commonwealth v AJL20 [2021] HCA 21
Citation 4 (Para 12)

…FCA 2 at [6]‑[7]; SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 at [10], [12]‑[13]; SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 at [8]‑[12], [23]‑[25]; NAGA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 at [10]‑[11], [64]; Daniel v Minister for Immig…
Aor21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] FCCA 958
Citation 5 (Para 11)

…7] (Beaumont J); SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 at [10], [12]-[13] (Selway J); SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 at [8]-[12], [23]-[25], [30] (von Doussa J); NAGA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 at [10]-[11], [6…
AJL20 v Commonwealth of Australia [2020] FCA 1305
Citation 6 (Para 6)

…7] (Beaumont J); SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 at [10], [12]-[13] (Selway J); SHFB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 294 at [8]-[12], [23]-[25], [30] (von Doussa J); NAGA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 at [10]-[11], [6…
SHDB v Goodwin [2003] FCA 300
Citation 7 (Para 1)

…, brought under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), raises very similar issues to those considered in Action No S 19 of 2003, SHFB v Goodwin & Ors [2003] FCA 294 ( SHFB ). Judgment in that matter is being delivered at the same time as this judgment. Both applicant SHFB and the present applicant, SHDB, have pre…

See all citing cases →

Cases Cited

NAGA v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224
Citation 1 (Para 3)

…s of the Act has been considered have very recently been reviewed by Emmett J in NAGA v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 224 ( NAGA ). I see no good reason for repeating that review. The decision in NAGA concerned six applicants who were unlawful non-citizens who had been i…
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth [2003] HCA 2
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…anguage: Coco v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 427 at 437 per Mason CJ, Brennan, Gaudron and McHugh JJ, and Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia [2003] HCA 2 at [30] per Gleeson CJ.…
SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29
Citation 3 (Para 7)

…y Selway J on 29 January 2003 and judgment was delivered on 30 January 2003: SHFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 29 ( SHFB ). His Honour noted at [1] that at the time of the hearing it remained the view of DIMIA officers that “the removal of [SHFB] from Australia i…
Daniel v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 20
Citation 4 (Para 8)

…02] FCA 1009 ( Al Masri ) and concluding with the decision of Whitlam J in Daniel v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 20 ( Daniel ), Selway J held that the continued detention of the applicant was not unlawful, and dismissed the application for a writ in the nature of h…
NAES v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 2
Citation 5 (Para 2)

…ions in s 198.” That construction was agreed with by Beaumont J in NAES v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 2 ( NAES ) and by Whitlam J in Daniel .…
WAIS v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1625
Citation 6 (Para 8)

…ferred. His Honour preferred the analysis of Whitlam J in Daniel and French J in WAIS v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1625 ( WAIS ) to the reasoning of Merkel J in Al Masri . In Al Masri , Merkel J (at [39]) held that: “If a Court is satisfied that the Minister is not tak…
Al Masri v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1009
Citation 7 (Para 8)

…s of single Judges of this Court commencing with the decision of Merkel J in Al Masri v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1009 ( Al Masri ) and concluding with the decision of Whitlam J in Daniel v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 2…
Cabal v United Mexican States (No 2) [2000] FCA 295
Citation 8 (Para 8)

…tions to the Court may be made for orders in the nature of writs of habeas corpus (as to which see Goldberg J in Cabal v United Mexican States (No 2) [2000] FCA 295 at [30], dealing with the analogous situation of successive applications for bail), in the circumstances of the present case, if I were to follow and…
Coco v the Queen [1994] HCA 15
Citation 9 (Para 1)

…ate or curtail fundamental rights or freedoms unless such an intention is clearly manifest by unmistakable and unambiguous language: Coco v The Queen (1994) 179 CLR 427 at 437 per Mason CJ, Brennan, Gaudron and McHugh JJ, and Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia [2003] HCA 2 at [30] per Gleeson CJ.…
Chu Kheng Lim v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs [1992] HCA 64
Citation 10 (Para 1)

…ower to make laws in respect of aliens: see s 51(xix) of the Constitution and Lim v The Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1992) 176 CLR 1. Counsel argued that as s 196(1) contemplates that detention under s 189 will continue until the unlawful non-citizen is (a) removed from Australia,…
R v War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunal; Ex parte Bott [1933] HCA 33
Citation 11 (Para 11)

…ure which the respondent has refused or failed to perform, and which remains unperformed: R v War Pensions Entitlement Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Bott (1933) 50 CLR 228 at 242. The public duty which the applicant has a specific right to have performed is that which arises under s 198 of the Act, namely a duty resting…
[1974] 1 WLR 498 [1974] 1 WLR 498
Citation 12 (Para 14)

…Further, mandamus does not issue to compel the performance of the impossible: R v Bristol Corporation; Ex parte Hendy [1974] 1 WLR 498 at 503. As Ms Keenan has not been able to identify any third country to whom she could usefully direct further enquiry for a visa or travel authority for the applicant, and as the a…

Legislation Cited

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) 189, 196, 198
4 mentions (from Para 3)
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) 39B
2 mentions (from Para 1)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	S 19 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	SHFB APPLICANT
AND:	PHILIPPA GOODWIN FIRST RESPONDENT JULIE HELEN KEENAN SECOND RESPONDENT MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE OF ORDER:	3 APRIL 2003
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE:	3 APRIL 2003
PLACE:	ADELAIDE