Login / Join
You are here: Home 
Immigration Daily News Federal Court decisions - Migration Law - 10 September 2020
Immigration Daily News Federal Court decisions - Migration Law - 10 September 2020Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 1410
- 0 Comments
Federal Court decisions - Migration Law - 10 September 2020
| Applicant S270/2019 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] HCA 32 High Court of Australia Kiefel CJ; Gageler, Nettle, Gordon & Edelman JJ Migration law - respondent refused to revoke cancellation of appellant's Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa - appellant granted special leave to appeal - appellant contended Minister erroneously failed to consider whether 'non-refoulement obligations' owed to appellant - whether material before respondent raised issue whether Australia owed non-refoulement obligations concerning appellant and, if issue was raised, whether respondent deferred issue's consideration on basis any non-refoulment obligations 'could be considered if' appellant applied for protection visa - whether respondent 'was required to consider Australia's non-refoulement obligations' - whether appellant claimed fear of 'persecution or serious harm' - whether non-refoulment obligations 'a mandatory relevant consideration' under s501CA(4) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - held: issue whether Australia owed non-refoulment obligations not raised - non-refoulment obligations not a mandatory relevant consideration - appeal dismissed. Applicant S270/2019 |
| Mokhlis v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] HCA 30 High Court of Australia Edelman J Migration law - plaintiff transferred to Australia from Manus Island to receive 'medical treatment' under s198C(2) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) - plaintiff was 'unlawful non-citizen' under s14(1) Migration Act - plaintiff detained in immigration detention - defendants did not consider whether to exercise discretion to make 'residence determination' - plaintiff claimed he was suffering 'severe mental and physical harm' due to detention and that 'continued detention' was breach of duty of care by defendants - plaintiff sought 'range of remedies' preventing 'ongoing detention' - whether plaintiff's application hopeless - whether Court could remit matter to Federal Circuit Court - 'jurisdictional requirements' - "migration decision" - whether appropriate to remit matter - s44(1) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) - s75(v) Constitution - s476(1) Migration Act - Kazemi v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] HCATrans 124 - held: proceeding remitted to Federal Circuit Court of Australia under s44(1) Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). Mokhlis |
| Guclukol v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 148 Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia Katzmann, O'Callaghan & Derrington JJ Migration law - Minister cancelled appellant's visa under s501(3A) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) on basis of appellant's failure to pass 'character test' in s501(6) Migration Act ('cancellation decision') - appellant sought cancellation decision's revocation - Minister not satisfied 'his power to revoke' cancellation decision enlivened - Snaden J of Federal Court of Australia dismissed application for review of refusal to revoke cancellation decision - appellant appealed - '"no evidence" ground' - whether 'irrationality or legal unreasonableness' - whether 'failure to comprehend rehabilitation' - whether failure to understand and address submission - whether 'failure to take account of evidence' - held: appeal dismissed. Guclukol |
Source: https://benchmarkinc.com.au/web/
Immigration blog
The document titled "Migration English Language Te...
The Migration Amendment (Bridging Visas) Regulatio...
The Family Assistance (Pacific Australia Labour Mo...
On April 10, 2024, the High Court of Australia ren...
In a landmark ruling on April 10, 2024, the High C...