FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Yu v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1138
YOU SHENG YU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 588 OF 2000
HELY J
4 AUGUST 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 588 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
YOU SHENG YU
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
HELY J
DATE OF ORDER:
4 AUGUST 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application be dismissed with costs.
2.The respondent serve a copy of the order on the applicant.
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 588 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
YOU SHENG YU
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
HELY J
DATE:
4 AUGUST 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This matter was listed for directions before Registrar Hedge on 22 June 2000 and the matter was then fixed for hearing before me at 10.15 am this morning. The applicant was present at the directions hearing and according to a notation on the short notes of order, the directions given included a direction that the matter be listed for hearing at 10.15 am this morning, were translated to Mr Yu by a Mandarin interpreter.
Mr Yu is not present this morning and he has not been in contact with the respondent's solicitors. Nor has he complied with the direction that he file and serve an outline of submissions five working days prior to the hearing date. In those circumstances, Mr Pearson suggests that I should make an order under Order 32 rule 2(1)(c) dismissing the application and I propose to do so. I order that the application be dismissed with costs and I direct that the respondent serve a copy of this order upon the applicant.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Hely. Associate:
Dated: 14 August 2000
No appearance by the applicant Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 4 August 2000 Date of Judgment: 4 August 2000
- AGLC
- Yu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1138
- Case
- [2000] FCA 1138
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister's decision to cancel Yu's visa was lawful, particularly concerning the application of procedural fairness and the correctness of the decision. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the Minister provided Yu with an opportunity to respond to the allegations and whether the decision was based on appropriate and relevant considerations. The court also had to examine whether the Minister's decision to cancel the visa was legally sound and whether the visa cancellation was proportionate to the offence committed.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that the Minister's decision to cancel Yu's visa was procedurally fair and legally sound. The court held that Yu was given a sufficient opportunity to respond to the allegations against him, and the decision-making process adhered to the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, the court found that the Minister's decision to cancel the visa was based on appropriate and relevant considerations, and the visa cancellation was proportionate to the nature and seriousness of Yu's criminal activities. Consequently, the court dismissed Yu's application for judicial review and ordered that the Minister serve a copy of the order on the applicant.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application be dismissed with costs.
2. The respondent serve a copy of the order on the applicant.
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: HELY J
Full text does not contain this section.