Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

Case [2021] HCASL 106


SINGH

v

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, MIGRANT SERVICES AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ANOR

[2021] HCASL 106
A23/2020

  1. A single judge of the Federal Court of Australia (Rangiah J), exercising the appellate jurisdiction of the Federal Court under s 25(1AA) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), dismissed the applicant's appeal from the decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Judge Young). Judge Young had dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review of the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming the decision of a delegate of the then Minister for Immigration and Border Protection refusing to grant the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC), Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa.

  2. The applicant did not apply to this Court for special leave to appeal against the orders of Rangiah J.  Instead, the applicant filed a notice of appeal in the Federal Court against the orders of Rangiah J.  White J dismissed the applicant's appeal because the Federal Court did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine that appeal.  The applicant has not identified a question of principle of general importance sufficient to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal and otherwise advances no arguable ground of appeal against the decision of White J.  Any appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospects of success and it would not be in the interests of justice generally or in the particular circumstances of this case to grant special leave.  Special leave should be refused.

  3. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

M.M. Gordon S.H.P. Steward
17 June 2021
Details
AGLC
Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2021] HCASL 106
Case
[2021] HCASL 106
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs, the applicant, Mr Singh, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which upheld a delegate's refusal to grant him a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC), Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa. The Federal Circuit Court dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review, a decision which was subsequently upheld on appeal to the Federal Court. Mr Singh did not seek special leave to appeal from the Federal Court, instead lodging an appeal in the Federal Court itself. The Federal Court dismissed the appeal, holding that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter. Mr Singh then sought special leave to appeal to the High Court.

The primary legal issue was whether the Federal Court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a decision of another single judge of the Federal Court. This issue arose because Mr Singh did not seek special leave to appeal the decision of the Federal Court, instead lodging a notice of appeal directly in the Federal Court. The Federal Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal, a decision which Mr Singh sought to challenge by applying for special leave to appeal to the High Court. The High Court was required to determine whether there were sufficient grounds to grant special leave to appeal.

The High Court held that there were no arguable grounds for granting special leave to appeal. The Court noted that an appeal from a decision of a single judge of the Federal Court required special leave to be granted by the High Court, and that such leave was only granted in limited circumstances. The Court found that Mr Singh had not identified a question of principle of general importance, nor had he advanced any other arguable ground of appeal against the decision of the Federal Court. The Court concluded that any appeal to the High Court would enjoy no prospects of success and it would not be in the interests of justice to grant special leave.

The High Court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order to that effect. This outcome means that the decision of the Federal Court dismissing the appeal remains the final decision in the matter.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.