Specialist in Australian Immigration, Migration Consultant and Online Australian Visa Assessment Service.
Australian Immigration Specialists - Australian Immigration Consultants Online Australian Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia
  Research Home

Categories
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Federal Court
Federal Magistrates Court
Full Federal Court
High Court
Migration Review Tribunal
Other Jurisdictions
Refugee Review Tribunal
Recently Added
Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51 (6 September 2001)
Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] HCA 43 (9 September 2004)
Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal; Lie v Refugee Review Tribunal [2002] HCA 30

"Use the Migration Specialists that migration agents use"
Cases

1 The appeal to this Court is against a dismissal by the learned primary judge of an application to the Court following the filing by the respondent of a notice of objection to competency. It is now conceded on behalf of the respondent that the application to the court was competent. A decision of the High Court touching on this issue has been published since the learned primary judge's order was made.

2 The respondent nonetheless invites the Court to dismiss the appeal on the basis that the application itself is patently without merit. No application has at any time been made to the Court for the summary dismissal of the application on the ground that it discloses no reasonable basis.

Gomes v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003

Gomes v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 100 (9 May 2003)
Last Updated: 21 May 2003


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Gomes v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 100


GABRIAL PATRICK GOMES v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 1197 of 2002

BRANSON, MADGWICK & ALLSOP JJ

9 MAY 2003

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA



NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1197 of 2002



ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA





BETWEEN:
GABRIAL PATRICK GOMES

APPELLANT


AND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT


JUDGE:
BRANSON, MADGWICK & ALLSOP JJ


DATE OF ORDER:
9 MAY 2003


WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY




THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be allowed and the orders of the primary judge set aside.

2. The matter be remitted to the primary judge for hearing.

3. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of the appeal.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA



NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1197 of 2002



ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA





BETWEEN:
GABRIAL PATRICK GOMES

APPELLANT


AND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT




JUDGE:
BRANSON, MADGWICK & ALLSOP JJ


DATE:
9 MAY 2003


PLACE:
SYDNEY





REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT

1 The appeal to this Court is against a dismissal by the learned primary judge of an application to the Court following the filing by the respondent of a notice of objection to competency. It is now conceded on behalf of the respondent that the application to the court was competent. A decision of the High Court touching on this issue has been published since the learned primary judge's order was made.

2 The respondent nonetheless invites the Court to dismiss the appeal on the basis that the application itself is patently without merit. No application has at any time been made to the Court for the summary dismissal of the application on the ground that it discloses no reasonable basis.

3 The application is brought in an area of the Court's jurisdiction where leave to institute a proceeding is not required. That is, there is ordinarily no impediment in the way of an applicant approaching the Court for a review of a decision of a tribunal even though the application itself may be without merit. In our view, the appropriate place for the merits of this application to be considered is before the primary judge.

4 The appropriate orders, in our view, are as follows:

1. The appeal be allowed and the orders of the primary judge set aside.

2. The matter be remitted to the primary judge for hearing.

3. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of the appeal.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Court.




Associate:

Dated: 21 May 2003

Counsel for the Applicant:
Mr T Reilly






Counsel for the Respondent:
Mr J Smith






Solicitor for the Respondent:
Blake Dawson Waldron






Date of Hearing:
9 May 2003






Date of Judgment:
9 May 2003


Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia