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

WACB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2

WACB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Immigration - Refugees - Non-citizen - Illiterate and unaccompanied minor in immigration detention - Application for review by the Federal Court of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal - Whether under s 478(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) the application for review was lodged within 28 days of the applicant being notified of the decision - Whether applicant "notified of the decision" under s 478(1)(b) by being told of outcome of decision - Whether giving to the applicant the written statement under s 430 is required for notification under s 478(1)(b).

Statutes - Construction - Whether under s 478(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) the application for review was lodged within 28 days of the applicant being notified of the decision - Whether the Minister's obligations as statutory guardian under s 6 of the Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946 (Cth) are relevant to the construction of s 478(1)(b).

Appellant S395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; A

Appellant S395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Appellant S396/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Immigration - Refugees - Particular social group identified as homosexual men in Bangladesh - Whether well-founded fear of persecution - Whether error of law by Refugee Review Tribunal in finding that no real chance of persecution because appellants conducted themselves discreetly and would continue to do so - Whether finding had effect of requiring appellants to act discreetly to avoid persecution - Whether need to act discreetly to avoid serious harm constituted persecution.

Applicant S v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2004] HCA

Applicant S v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Immigration - Refugees - Application for protection visa - Well-founded fear of persecution for reason of membership of particular social group - Particular social group identified as able-bodied young men from Afghanistan - Whether member of a particular social group - Whether Afghan society must perceive the particular social group - Whether well-founded fear of persecution - Whether enmity or malignity necessary to establish persecution - Whether facts reveal law of general application - Whether implementation of law of general application can amount to persecution - Whether implementation of ad hoc policy can amount to persecution.

Words and phrases: "Particular social group", "well-founded fear of persecution", "law of general application", "legitimate national objective".

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Epeabaka [2

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Epeabaka

Immigration - Refugees - Protection visa - Affirmation by Refugee Review Tribunal of decision to refuse application for protection visa - Public statements made by Tribunal member on personal Internet home page about truthfulness of applicants for refugee status - Whether Pt 7 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) constitutes a code excluding the common law rules of natural justice and in particular the ostensible bias rule.

Administrative law - Natural justice - Bias - Reasonable apprehension of bias - Whether a reasonable party or member of the public might apprehend that decision of Tribunal member was affected by a prejudiced mind - Whether ostensible bias may be inferred from statements made after a decision.

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Ex pa

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Ex parte Applicants S134/2002

Immigration - Refugees - Temporary protection visas - Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") affirmed decision of delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs ("the Minister") not to grant protection visas - Minister not bound to consider whether to exercise power - Minister decided not to exercise power under s 417 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") to substitute for the decision of the Tribunal a decision more favourable to the prosecutors - Whether decisions of the Tribunal and the Minister "privative clause decisions" under s 474 of the Act.

Immigration - Refugees - Applications for temporary protection visas by mother and children - First prosecutor's application asserted that she was a person to whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugees Convention - Application not made on basis of membership of a family unit, to one of whom protection obligations were owed - Documents before the Tribunal indicated that the first prosecutor's husband held a temporary protection visa and had applied for a permanent protection visa - First prosecutor did not know of her husband's whereabouts or immigration status - Tribunal did not notice documents or appreciate their significance - Tribunal did not consider whether prosecutors entitled to protection visas on basis of membership of a family unit of which one person was owed protection obligations and had been granted a protection visa - Whether constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction - Whether denial of procedural fairness.

Immigration - Refugees - Whether jurisdictional error in decision by Minister to refuse to substitute for the decision of the Tribunal a decision more favourable to the prosecutors - Utility of relief.

Page :  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  97  98  99  100  101  102  103  104  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  118  119  120  121  122  123  124  125  126  127  128  129  130  131  132  133  134  135  136  137  138  139  140  141  142  143  144  145  146  147  148  149  150  151  152  153  154  155  156  157  158  159  160  161  162  163  164  165  166  167  168  169  170  171  172  173  174  175  176  177  178  179  180  181  182  183  184  185  186  187  188  189  190  191  192  193  194  195  196  197  198  199  200  201  202  203  204  205  206  207  208  209  210  211  212  213  214  215  216  217  218  219  220  221  222  223  224  225  226  227  228  229  230  231  232  233  234  235  236  237  238  239  240  241  242  243  244  245  246  247  248  249  250  251  252  253  254  255  256  257  258  259  260  261  262  263  264  265  266  267  268  269  270  271  272  273  274  275  276  277  278  279  280  281  282  283  284  285  286  287  288  289  290  291  292  293  294  295  296  297  298  299  300  301  302  303  304  305  306  307  308  309  310  311  312  313  314  315  316  317  318  319  320  321  322  323  324  325  326  327  328  329  330  331  332  333  334  335  336  337  338  339  340  341  342  343  344  345  346  347  348  349  350  351  352  353  354  355  356  357  358  359  360  361  362 
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia