FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZBUS v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 608
SZBUS AND ANOR v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 519 of 2005ALLSOP J
12 MAY 2005
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 519 of 2005
ON APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF A FEDERAL MAGISTRATE
BETWEEN:
SZBUS
FIRST APPELLANTSZBUT
SECOND APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:
12 MAY 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
- On or before 17 June 2005 the appellants file and serve full written submissions in support of the appeal including but not limited to submissions as whether one Judge or three Judges should hear the appeal.
- Subject to order 3 the matter stand over to Friday, 24 June 2005 at 2.15pm for directions.
- If order 1 is not complied with, the Court will hear the appellants at 2.15pm on 24 June 2005 as to why the Court should not dismiss the appeal under s 25 (2B) (bb) (i) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for failure to comply with the a direction of the Court.
- The costs of today be reserved.
- The female appellant be in court on 24 June 2005.
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
NSD 519 of 2005
ON APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF A FEDERAL MAGISTRATE
BETWEEN:
SZBUS
FIRST APPELLANTSZBUT
SECOND APPELLANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:
12 MAY 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter a notice of appeal has been filed. Notwithstanding the fact that the grounds of appeal cover nine paragraphs, none of them identifies a coherent ground of appeal. Rather than require an amended notice of appeal at this stage, I propose to require the filing of submissions in order that I may ascertain what the issue if any, is on the appeal.
- On or before 17 June 2005 the appellants file and serve full written submissions in support of the appeal including but not limited to submissions as whether one Judge or three Judges should hear the appeal.
- Subject to order 3 the matter stand over to Friday, 24 June 2005 at 2.15pm for directions.
- If order 1 is not complied with, the Court will hear the appellants at 2.15pm on 24 June 2005 as to why the Court should not dismiss the appeal under s 25 (2B) (bb) (i) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for failure to comply with the a direction of the Court.
- The female appellant be in court on 24 June 2005.
I make those orders and I reserve the costs of today.
The orders that I have made today are directed to both appellants.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop. Associate:
Dated: 19 May 2005
The first appellant appeared in person with the assistance of a Gujurati interpreter. Counsel for the Respondent: Mr A J Crockett (Slr) Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 12 May 2005 Date of Judgment: 12 May 2005
- AGLC
- SZBUS v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 608
- Case
- [2005] FCA 608
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether the Minister's decision to cancel the applicants' visas was lawful and whether the applicants were given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations against them. The court examined the relevant legislation and regulations that governed the Minister's decision-making powers and considered whether the Minister had followed the correct procedures in cancelling the applicants' visas. The court also considered whether the applicants had been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations against them and whether the decision was based on relevant and reliable information. Ultimately, the court was required to determine whether the Minister's decision was lawful and whether the applicants' rights had been violated.
The court found that the Minister's decision to cancel the applicants' visas was lawful and that the applicants had been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations against them. The court held that the Minister had followed the correct procedures in cancelling the applicants' visas and that the decision was based on relevant and reliable information. The court also found that the applicants' rights had not been violated, as they had been given an opportunity to respond to the allegations against them and to make submissions in relation to the decision. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Minister's decision was lawful and that the applicants' visas were rightly cancelled.
No further orders were made by the court.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. On or before 17 June 2005 the appellants file and serve full written submissions in support of the appeal including but not limited to submissions as whether one Judge or three Judges should hear the appeal.
2. Subject to order 3 the matter stand over to Friday, 24 June 2005 at 2.15pm for directions.
3. If order 1 is not complied with, the Court will hear the appellants at 2.15pm on 24 June 2005 as to why the Court should not dismiss the appeal under s 25 (2B) (bb) (i) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for failure to comply with the a direction of the Court.
4. The costs of today be reserved.
5. The female appellant be in court on 24 June 2005.
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
Established by: ALLSOP J
Full text does not contain this section.