Please select a judgment type from the filter below to view relevant judgments. On the AustLii website you can access previous judgments types FCoA (Appeals) judgments, FCoA First instance judgments, and FCC judgments.

Division 2 - General federal law

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (subclass 500) visa – judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – failure to consider evidence – failure to afford procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Protection Visa – Bangladesh – Political persecution – Sexual assault – Relocation - Unreasonableness - Unwarranted assumption – Consideration of corroborative evidence – Failure to consider a claim – Application dismissed with costs

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether Tribunal failed to afford meaningful hearing opportunity to applicant – whether, including as a consequence, Tribunal failed to consider best interests of child – whether findings inconsistent

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Protection Visa - Application dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Administrative Appeals Tribunal - Protection Visa – China – Where applicant provided limited documentation in support of his claim to the Tribunal – Impermissible merits review – Failure to consider country information – Application dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether cl 186.222 of the Migration Regulations is invalid by reason of inconsistency with s 55 of the Migration Act as found in Berenguel, despite relevant amendment

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – protection visa – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the conduct of the applicant’s migration agent or a third party amounted to a fraud on the Tribunal – no evidence before the Court to establish fraud – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Temporary Graduate (Post Study Work Stream) (subclass 485) visa – application made more than six months after completion of course – application therefore did not comply with cl.485.231 – no jurisdictional error.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the statutory requirements for a protection visa – whether the Tribunal’s reasoning process is unreasonable or illogical – whether the Tribunal failed to address aspects of the applicants’ evidence – whether the Tribunal was biased – no jurisdictional error – Ministerial Intervention – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – industrial law –– where the applicant commenced proceeding in this Court alleging contraventions of Part 3-1 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – where at time of application there was an extant complaint in the Australian Human Rights Commission – where AHRC complaint was later withdrawn by applicant – where respondents seek dismissal of Court proceeding to the extent that conduct pleaded is substantially the same as conduct identified in the AHRC complaint – whether s 734(1) of the FW Act is engaged in relation to this conduct – whether there is any jurisdictional impediment to the applicant commencing a fresh application in this Court – dismissal application allowed – leave granted to the applicant to commence fresh general protections application out of time

Judgment published date:

FAIR WORK – interlocutory application by third respondent for summary dismissal under s 143 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) and r 13.13 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) – whether there are no reasonable prospects of the applicant proving the third respondent is a ‘responsible franchisor entity’ as defined under s 558A(2) or a holding company under s 558B(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether any deficiency in the pleadings against the third respondent is incurable – summary dismissal of the proceeding against the third respondent refused on the basis the deficiency in the pleadings may be curable by amendment – leave granted to amend the statement of claim to plead accessorial liability pursuant to s 550 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision not to grant a Protection (Class XA) (subclass 866) visa – dismissal for non-appearance

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – protection visa – judicial review of decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – whether finding as to receiving country open – whether the applicant’s claim of statelessness clearly articulated or emerges from materials – whether statement given to authority was new information – where statement provided outside time allowed – whether Authority acted unreasonably in not accepting statement or not seeking further information – whether Authority considered all relevant information – whether all claims for protection considered individually and cumulatively – whether the Authority misconstrued or misapplied the statutory tests for refugee and complementary protection – where asserted errors invite merits review – no jurisdictional error established

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – dismissal for non-appearance – costs ordered.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for default judgment – discretionary – whether court should give default judgment where primary claim seems questionable. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – alleged Trade Mark infringement – Trade Mark consisting of the word “Snakeman” – whether that trade mark is a descriptive term. DEFAMATION – associated jurisdiction – whether defamation action arises from substantially the same or closely connected facts to the Trade Mark claim

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – protection (subclass 866) visa – review of decision of the (then) Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) – judicial review – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant facts – whether the Tribunal considered the statehood of the applicant’s child – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness – whether the Tribunal failed to do its duty – Tribunal’s decision not attended by jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – matter listed for a directions hearing – no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – application dismissed for non-appearance pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the primary applicant was not subject of an approved employer nomination visa therefore did not satisfy cl.186.223 – application is dismissed with costs

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION - application for an extension of time for judicial review of a decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where substantive application lodged 3 days out of time - where substantive application fundamentally lacks merit and therefore is futile – extension of time not in the interests of the administration of justice and application refused.

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW - where there was evidence of a failure on the part of each respondent to comply with a duly issued compliance notice - where the respondents have failed to participate in the proceedings – where declarations and pecuniary penalty orders made accordingly. 
 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION LAW – application for judicial review – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Protection (subclass 866) visa – where applicant was granted a protection visa which was subsequently cancelled – where applicant had returned to Iraq on two occasions following grant of protection visa notwithstanding claimed fears of harm – consideration of whether Tribunal engaged in illogical or irrational reasoning – where it was open for the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant had provided incorrect information – consideration of whether Tribunal failed to comply with ss 424A and 424AA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – finding that applicant was put on notice of and did respond to the Tribunal’s concerns – consideration of whether Tribunal acted unreasonably in refusing two adjournment requests – finding that first refusal of adjournment not unreasonable and applicant has not established on balance of probabilities that second adjournment request was made – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed with costs. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION -  protection visa - application for judicial review of decision of Immigration Assessment Authority refusing visa – where applicant bore scars relating to alleged torture – where scars visually inspected and described by the delegate – where Authority relied on delegate’s description – whether there was an informational gap in the review – whether Authority should have invited applicant to interview – where Authority obtained recent country information not available to delegate – whether Authority failed to properly consider later information regarding monitoring of social media activities by Iranian authorities – whether Authority relied on outdated country information – no error found 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION –  protection visa – where applicant claims to fear harm due to conversion to Christianity – testing of applicant’s religious beliefs - whether the Immigration Assessment Authority erred by applying an arbitrary and unexplained standard of doctrinal knowledge in considering applicant’s commitment to Christianity – whether the Authority considered the particular circumstances of the applicant – whether the Authority erred in relying upon findings recorded by the delegate without interrogation of the source material  – whether the Authority made findings without a probative basis –  no jurisdictional error - application dismissed with costs  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Where Tribunal failed to comply with section 359A obligation in relation to information which would have been a potential basis for affirming the decision, by ultimately finding on an alternative basis 
 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Review of Registrar decision made out of time – where applicant fails to seek extension of time, elect for oral hearing and make written submissions – review application is susceptible to dismissal as incompetent  
 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for an extension of time for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where substantive application lodged 9 days after expiry of the statutory timeframe – where substantive application is futile and lacks merit – extension of time ought not be granted – application refused.
 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – admitted contraventions by CFMMEU official who acted in an improper manner whilst exercising the right to enter private premises and by the CFMMEU through its involvement – consideration of relevant factors – common course of conduct principle applied – declaratory relief granted and pecuniary penalties with partial personal payment ordered.   

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair work – application for breaches of the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – employer failed to pay wages and commissions – termination of employment following provision on medical certificate – where the respondents have failed to take any steps in the proceedings – principles to be applied in undefended proceedings – assessment of damages – quantum of penalty to be imposed – to whom should the penalty imposed be paid – matters to be considered 
 

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for leave to institute fresh proceedings following vexatious litigant orders-application dismissed

Judgment published date:

HUMAN RIGHTS – where the applicant’s claim was dismissed – where costs usually follow the event – where amendments to legislation limiting the circumstances in which costs orders might be made in a proceeding commenced under the provisions of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act had no bearing upon the making of costs orders in the current proceeding – where the usual costs order was made.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for leave to institute proceedings following vexatious litigant orders - – proposed proceedings dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – review of decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – whether unreasonable failure to exercise power to invite applicant for interview – where different findings less favourable to applicant made by the Immigration Assessment Authority – where Minister’s delegate had benefit of observing applicant’s demeanour – whether reasoning in relation to credibility irrational or illogical – whether reasoning in relation to credibility unreasonable – whether credibility reasoning made by reference to a false factual premise – whether material jurisdictional error

Judgment published date:

 MIGRATION – reasons for judgment delivered ex tempore – application for extension of time –  where substantive application seeks judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to affirm a delegate’s decision not to grant a protection visa –  application is dismissed with costs.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review application – decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – affirmation of refusal to grant Safe Haven Enterprise visa – citizen of Sri Lanka of Tamil ethnicity – family support for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam – personal assistance to the Tamil National Alliance in parliamentary elections – alleged threats to and abduction by paramilitary groups – single unparticularised ground of review – further grounds raised orally at hearing – whether failure to understand threats and risks of harm from paramilitary groups – whether failure to consider evidence of political activity in correspondence from local officials – where correspondence not provided in translated form – whether treatment available in Sri Lanka for mental health conditions and following liver transplant – whether failure to understand medical treatment needs and available services following liver transplant – whether failure to understand mental health needs – whether jurisdictional error.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Where there was a delay of 136 days in filing an application for review of the decision of the Tribunal – where there was no reasonable explanation provided in any affidavit for the delay – where the substantive grounds of review lacked merit and were not arguable – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – citizen of Pakistan – Pashtun Shi’a Muslim of the Turi tribe – whether failure to take into account relevant and cogent country information – whether findings legally unreasonable – whether unreasonable failure to consider matters raised – whether finding concerning applicant’s ability and willingness to travel and associated conclusion regarding risk of harm was made without evidence or was legally unreasonable – whether failure to consider claim concerning fear of harm whilst travelling and whether fear of harm was well – founded – whether material jurisdictional error

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – protection visa –whether Tribunal failed to inquire – whether inquiry obvious – whether inquiry would have gleaned information that could have led to a different outcome – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection (Subclass 866) visa - Application for judicial review – Where applicant failed to attend scheduled hearing – Application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – work skilled (subclass 457) visa – visa refused – first applicant in breach of cl 457.223 of sch 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) as she was not the subject to an approved nomination with a prospective employer – decision of the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) to affirm the delegate’s decision – judicial review – whether the applicants were appropriately notified of the changes to the subclass 457 visa scheme – whether the applicants received the Tribunal’s correspondence to comment on the changes to the subclass 457 visa scheme – whether the applicants were given sufficient time to procure a nomination approval – Tribunal’s decision not attended by jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Student visa – Application for judicial review – Where applicants failed to attend scheduled hearing – Application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether student visa applicant was genuine temporary entrant

Judgment published date:

BANKRUPTCY – Creditor’s Petition for a sequestration order - Applicant holds multiple costs orders against Respondent – Respondent alleges he is a whistleblower and should have never had a judgment made against him – Respondent alleges he does not owe the costs debt in question – whether there is other sufficient cause to apply court’s discretion to not make sequestration order- Respondent alleges he has multiple ongoing claims against Applicant in other courts for an equivalent and/or greater amount than the debts claimed against him – Respondent alleges Applicant pursuing sequestration order with intent of securing object other than recovering a debt – namely to stifle ongoing claims in other courts – whether issuance of bankruptcy notice amounts to an abuse of process

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Adverse action – application to strike out statement of claim – where statement of claim clearly deficient – orders made to strike out statement of claim and permit the Applicant to replead, or set out her claims in an alternative form.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection (subclass 866) visa – Application for review of Registrar’s decision – Extension of time of four days required – Where Registrar dismissed the application for judicial review for non-appearance and then dismissed an application for reinstatement – Where the judicial review grounds have no reasonable prospects of success – Application for extension of time refused – Application for review of Registrar’s decision refused – Order for costs

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – extension of time – seven days out of time – protection visa – inadequate explanation for delay – no reasonably arguable case for jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – whether applicant denied procedural fairness – whether Tribunal’s reasoning process was illogical and unreasonable - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION — Judicial review — protection visa — non appearance of applicant — default judgment — leave for notice of discontinuance refused — application dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION –Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – protection (class XA) (subclass 866) visa – whether Tribunal’s findings unreasonable – invalid certificate – whether denial of procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed