Australian Immigration Daily News

If you ever deal with or advise on Protection visas, you should be aware of a decision that was handed down by the Full Court yesterday, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v CTW17 (2019) FCAFC 156 (5 September 2019).

The issue that was addressed in this case involved whether it is possible to make a valid application from onshore for a Protection visa if a previous application has been refused.

Readers may recall that in 2013, an earlier decision of the Full Court in SZGIZ had effectively opened the door for renewed applications made on complementary protection grounds even if a previous application made on "refugee" grounds had been refused.  

In essence, the decision in SZGIZ said that so long as a later application sought to satisfy a different criterion form the criterion that had been the basis for an earlier, refused application, that application was valid.

However, there was an amendment to the Migration Act in 2014 - the Migration Amendment Act (No 1)  which was enacted to respond to and effectively close the exception that was created by SZGIZ.

And this latest decision from the Full Court in CTW17  confirms that the 2014 amendment had exactly the legal effect that was intended: specifically, the amendment does in fact prevent the making of any further Protection visa application once an initial application has been refused, without regard to the nature of the claims made in the applications.

In other words, subsequent applications can no longer be validly made even if they are predicated on entirely different grounds, or criteria, than were the basis of an earlier, refused application.

If you want to read details about this decision, there's a new article on The Migration Messenger which you can access by clicking here.