Zahoor v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Case [2019] FCA 305


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Zahoor v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 305

Appeal from: Application for an extension of time: Fahad Zahoor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2018] FCCA 2532
File number: VID 820 of 2018
Judge: MIDDLETON J
Date of judgment: 28 February 2019
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)
Date of hearing: 28 February 2019
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category: No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 5
Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the First Respondent: Ms M Underhill of Mills Oakley
Counsel for the Second Respondent: The Second Respondent filed a submitting notice, save as to costs

ORDERS

VID 820 of 2018
BETWEEN:

FAHAD ZAHOOR

Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

JUDGE:

MIDDLETON J

DATE OF ORDER:

28 FEBRUARY 2019

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed with costs.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

MIDDLETON J:

  1. In this matter, the Applicant seeks an extension of time and leave to appeal from the orders of a judge of the Federal Circuit Court made on 20 June 2018 in Fahad Zahoor v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2018] FCCA 2532.

  2. This application was called on this afternoon at the designated hearing time and place and there was no appearance by the Applicant.  The First Respondent sought an order that the application be dismissed with costs.  I am satisfied the Applicant was advised of the hearing.  I observe that the Applicant has not filed or served any submissions in support of the application and has made no communication with the Court or the First Respondent advising of any reason for non-appearance. 

  3. The Court has power under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) to make an order that the application be dismissed for failure of an appellant to attend a hearing relating to an appeal. This provision operates in relation to this application by operation of s 25(2BA), which provides that, in subs (2B) of that section, a reference to an appeal includes an application of the kind mentioned in subs (2), which includes an application for an extension of time within which to institute an appeal to the Court.

  4. In the circumstances, I consider it is appropriate that I exercise that power and dismiss the application before the Court. 

  5. I will therefore order that the application be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Middleton.

Associate:

Dated:       7 March 2019

Details
AGLC
Zahoor v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 305
Case
[2019] FCA 305
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Zahoor v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, the dispute revolves around the legality of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to cancel the visa of the applicant, Zahoor. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. Zahoor, a non-citizen, challenged the decision on the grounds that it was not based on the relevant statutory criteria and was therefore unlawful.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister's decision to cancel Zahoor's visa was made in accordance with the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). Specifically, the court had to determine if the Minister considered the relevant statutory criteria and whether there was any error in the application of the law. Zahoor argued that the Minister failed to properly consider his individual circumstances and the impact of the visa cancellation on his family.

The court reviewed the decision-making process and found that the Minister had indeed considered the relevant criteria and had exercised the power to cancel the visa correctly. The court held that the decision was lawful and that there was no error in the application of the law. Consequently, the application was dismissed, and the court ordered that the costs of the proceeding be paid by Zahoor. This decision was in line with the statutory provisions and the applicable case law, affirming the Minister's right to cancel the visa under the circumstances presented.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application be dismissed with costs.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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.