MIGRATION – student visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal considered the applicant’s progression and intention to study – whether the Tribunal took irrelevant considerations into account – allegations of bias – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed 

MIGRATION – judicial review – student visa – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant evidence – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably – procedural fairness – whether weight given to certain evidence reveals jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error found – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming a decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa – whether the delegate failed to take into account relevant considerations – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the correct test for degrading treatment or punishment – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed. 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – copyright – whether copyright of which the applicant employer is the owner subsists in data contained in files (RAMA Keycap template files) which when accessed by a computer program generates 2D and 3D representations of keycap design and keycap collaboration templates – copyright subsists - whether information the employee downloaded from the employer’s server to a device or devices the employee controlled included the RAMA Keycap template files – whether having downloaded the RAMA Keycap template files the employee infringed copyright that subsists in the RAMA Keycap templates – employee infringed employer’s copyright in the RAMA Keycap templates - whether the employee reproduced a substantial part of the RAMA Keycap design templates to create keycap design templates which the employee on her own behalf and as the controller of a company used to create keycap design templates which in turn the employee and the company used to manufacture and sell artisan keycaps in competition with the employer – employee and company reproduced a substantial part of the RAMA Keycap design templates and for that reason infringed the employer’s copyright in the RAMA Keycap design templates. 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – breach of confidence – where the employee downloads files from the applicant employer’s server which the employer alleges is confidential to the employer – whether the employer has identified the information the employee downloaded which the employer alleges is confidential – whether the information the employer has identified is confidential – employee downloaded information that is confidential to the employer – whether the employee’s downloading of the information was a breach of confidence – to the extent the information the employee downloaded included the RAMA template files whether the employee and through the company the employee established and controlled, misused the RAMA template files – the employee and through her the company misused the confidential information contained in the RAMA Keycap design template files to manufacture artisan templates which the company sold in competition with the employer. 

EMPLOYMENT LAW – whether the employee breached terms of her employment contract, fiduciary duties, and statutory duties imposed by s 182(1) and s 183(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) by downloading information that included the RAMA Keycap template files that were confidential to the employer for the purpose of establishing a competing business to the business of the employer and using that information to manufacture artisan keycaps which a company the employee established and controlled sold in competition with the employer – the employee breached her employment contract and the fiduciary and statutory duties – whether the company established by the employee to undertake the competing business knowingly assisted the employee in breaching her fiduciary duties and was involved in the employee’s contraventions of her statutory duties – the company knowingly assisted in the employee’s breaches of her fiduciary duties and was involved in the employee’s breaches of statutory duty.

FAIR WORK – General Protections – Whether the employer dismissed the employee from employment because he had made workplace complaints – Whether the employer dismissed the employee from employment because he was temporarily absent from work because of illness – Where the employer dismissed the employee because of concerns about the employee’s performance and not because of workplace complaints or because he was temporarily absent – General protections claim dismissed

FAIR WORK – Section 323(1) – Requirement for an employer to pay an employee amounts payable to the employee in relation to the performance of work in full at least monthly – Whether employer did not pay the employee’s salary for the final week of his employment during the relevant period – Application as to contravention of s. 323(1) dismissed

FAIR WORK – National employment standards - Where the employer made admissions that it had not made a payment in lieu of notice, paid redundancy pay or paid accrued and unused annual leave to the employee as at the date of dismissal – Where the employer paid those entitlements at a later date –Declarations as to contraventions made

FAIR WORK – Accessorial liability – Where the Second Respondent was not an intentional participant in the primary contravener’s contraventions - Claim against the Second Respondent for accessorial liability dismissed  

MIGRATION – application for review of a Registrar’s decision – hearing de novo of first respondent’s application for summary dismissal – where applicant applied for judicial review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa – where Registrar summarily dismissed the applicant’s application for judicial review – where grounds unparticularised – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION LAW – whether the Tribunal had taken into account irrelevant considerations when arriving at its decision – whether the Tribunal had properly failed to identify and consider a relevant claim – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION – application for judicial review – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) (Subclass 820) visa – where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed decision of the first respondent – whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to information before it – whether the Tribunal failed to consider statutory declarations supporting the applicant’s claims – where the Tribunal did not expressly refer to the statutory declarations in its reasons – found it can be inferred that the Tribunal had regard to all of the evidence  – found no jurisdictional error on behalf of the Tribunal – application dismissed. 

FAIR WORK – Whether the first respondent contravened provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 – where first respondent found to have contravened provisions of the Act – whether the second to tenth respondents were accessorily liable in respect of the Club’s contraventions – where the second to tenth respondents were found to have been accessorily liable – where the first respondent’s contraventions were serious contraventions – where adverse action found to have been taken against the applicant – Orders accordingly. 

MIGRATION LAW – whether the Authority ought to have conducted an interview with the first applicant to clarify aspects of his claims – whether the decision of the Authority not to conduct an interview was legally unreasonable – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal engaged with the case put by the applicants in considering whether there were compelling reasons for not applying the criteria in Schedule 3 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – writs issued 

MIGRATION – application for review of a Registrar’s decision – hearing de novo of first respondent’s application for summary dismissal – where applicant applied for judicial review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Student (Temporary (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa – where Registrar summarily dismissed the applicant’s application for judicial review – found grounds of substantive application had no reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION LAW – whether the Tribunal had erred in the way in which it considered the applicant’s claims – whether the Tribunal had acted unreasonably in making findings – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.    

MIGRATION LAW – whether the provision of two BAS statements under cl. 888.224 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations was required to be undertaken at the time of the making of a visa application to the Minister – where such a requirement would be capricious – jurisdictional error established – application granted. 

COSTS – Proceedings under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)- proceedings dismissed summarily as abuse of process – application for costs – relevant considerations.

FAMILY LAW – contravention application – contraventions conceded – reasonable excuse 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Application for dismissal of second and third proceedings where the applicant seeks to raise matters that could have been or once had been raised in the first proceeding – whether abuse of process – relevant considerations – second and third proceedings dismissed 

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Jurisdiction – Whether the Applicant had standing to seek a declaration of a contravention of the whistleblowers protections in Part 9.4AAA of the Corporations Act 2001 – Whether the court has original jurisdiction under s. 131 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 to decide claims under the whistleblower protections of Part 9.4AAA of the Corporations Act– Alternatively, whether the court has jurisdiction as to the whistleblower protection claims under s. 134 of the FCFCOA Act because those matters are associated with matters in which the jurisdiction of the court is invoked – Held the applicant did not have standing to bring an application for a declaration – Held that the court did not have original jurisdiction as to the whistleblower protection claims – Held because the court did not have original jurisdiction the court did not have jurisdiction to grant a declaration under s. 141 of the FCFCOA Act – Held that the court had associated jurisdiction to grant other remedies as to the whistleblower protection claims  

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Copyright – whether the applicant is the owner of copyright in floor plans contained in brochures the applicant published – whether the respondent provided to a draftsperson a plan (copy plan) that combined parts of two separate floor plans contained in the brochures and by doing so authorised the draftsperson to design and prepare plans on the basis of the copy plan and therefore infringed the applicant’s copyright in the floor plans – not satisfied respondent provided the copy plan to the draftsperson or was otherwise aware the draftsperson used the copy plan to design plans for the constructions of a house – claim for infringement of copyright dismissed.  

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Application to reinstate proceeding summarily dismissed for non-appearance – relevant considerations.  

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Protection (Class XA) (Subclass 866) visa – where the Administrative Review Tribunal affirmed decision not to grant the Applicant the visa as the Applicant did not satisfy a person whom Australia has protection obligations of s36(2)(b) or s36(2)(c) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal erred by making an adverse inference with respect to credibility – found no credibility on behalf of the Tribunal – Application dismissed 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant applicant student visa – whether Tribunal required to exercise its power to obtain visa refusal decision concerning applicant’s wife – whether Tribunal made inconsistent findings – whether Tribunal made findings concerning courses, laws and policies in Nepal without evidence – whether Tribunal relied on personal or specialised knowledge to make findings – whether Tribunal made unwarranted assumption - application dismissed 

MIGRATION – student (class TU) (subclass 500) visa – where delegate cancelled visa under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) for non-compliance with visa condition – review of decision of the (then) Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) – whether Tribunal misapplied policy guidance when affirming delegate’s decision – Tribunal’s decision not attended by jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed

MIGRATION – Student visa cancellation – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant information or otherwise failed to afford that information proper weight – whether the Tribunal considered irrelevant information – whether the Tribunal erred by apportioning weight to the factors considered – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.   

MIGRATION – temporary graduate (post-work) (subclass 485) visa – where former Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed delegate’s decision that applicant did not satisfy cl 485.212 of the Regulations – where visa application was not accompanied by evidence that applicant sat an English language test within 3 years before the day on which the visa application was made – application for review of Registrar’s decision under s 256(1) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) – where Registrar summarily dismissed judicial review application pursuant to r 13.13 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) – no reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed

MIGRATION – partner (temporary) (subclass 820) and partner (residence) (subclass 801) visa – decision of the (then) Administrative Appeals Tribunal – no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – oral application to dismiss pursuant to r 13.06(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) – application dismissed with costs

MIGRATION - application for judicial review – student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa – where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed decision not to grant applicant the visa as applicant did not satisfy cl 500.212(a) of Sch 2 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – whether Tribunal erred by failing to provide genuine consideration to mandatory relevant considerations and the applicant’s immigration history – found no jurisdictional error on behalf of the Tribunal – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Student visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to consider evidence provided by the applicants – whether there were problems with the interpretation provided at the Tribunal hearing or the way in which the first applicant was questioned by the Tribunal – whether the first applicant met the criteria for the grant of the visa – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Student visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to relevant information or evidence – whether the Tribunal’s decision was affected by bias – whether the Tribunal failed to afford the applicant procedural fairness – whether the applicant was entitled to legal representation – whether the Tribunal erred by proceeding to determine the matter based on the evidence before it (without inviting the applicant to attend a hearing before it) – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

MIGRATION - application for judicial review – student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 573) visa – where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed decision not to grant applicant the visa as applicant did not comply with condition 8202(2)(a) – whether Tribunal erred by failing to provide genuine consideration to applicant’s personal circumstances – found no jurisdictional error on behalf of the Tribunal – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Student visa cancellation – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – extension of time request – minimal delay – no prejudice – inadequate explanation provided – no arguable case of jurisdictional error – extension of time refused.   

MIGRATION – judicial review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – refusal of adjournment application relying on inadequate medical certificate - dismissal for non-appearance at court hearing – costs ordered 

MIGRATION – student (class TU) (subclass 500) visa – review of decision of the (then) Administrative Appeals Tribunal – judicial review – genuine temporary entrant criterion – whether Tribunal considered irrelevant consideration – whether Tribunal’s decision irrational or illogical – whether Tribunal’s decision legally unreasonable – Tribunal’s decision attended by jurisdictional error – writ of certiorari issued – writ of mandamus issued

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Third party request for access to documents on the electronic court file – where matter very recently commenced – where respondents not known to be served or aware of the proceeding – applicable principles and consideration of the interests of justice.  

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application pursuant to r 17.05(2)(a) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) seeking reinstatement of a judicial review application – where the applicant’s application for judicial review was dismissed for non-appearance at a callover – application for reinstatement dismissed. 

 INDUSTRIAL LAW – application to strike out – where statement of claim does not follow Federal Court Rules in format – where statement of claim does not disclose a cause of action – where the Court not satisfied that the applicant can successfully prosecute his claim – statement of claim struck out – application summarily dismissed.  

MIGRATION LAW – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority to not grant a protection visa – claims related to imputed support for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam – profile of the Applicant – no error in relation to IAA’s consideration of relevant or new information – no logical probative ground for finding Applicant would have no imputed or suspected support of the LTTE based on the IAA’s other findings – error not material – application dismissed with costs 

MIGRATION – Persecution – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) decision – visa – protection visa – refusal.  ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Allegation that the IAA’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error.  

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – whether Tribunal erred in finding inconsistency and embellishment in applicant’s evidence - whether Tribunal failed to assess significance and weight of inconsistency – whether Tribunal misunderstood or failed to consider applicant’s explanation for inconsistency - application dismissed 

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal misconstrued s 36(2A) – whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction – “reasonable satisfaction” – whether failure to consider the applicant’s claims – whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s 424A – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Judicial review application – decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – citizens of Sri Lanka – ethnic Tamils – whether failure to obtain, supply and have regard to relevant material – whether material provided by the referred applicant to the person making the decision before the decision was made – whether any other material that is in the Secretary’s possession or control and is considered by the Secretary to be relevant to the review – whether failure to consider all integers of claims made – claim of inability to subsist – claim of extortion – whether failure to have regard to evidence – whether unreasonableness – whether jurisdictional error  WORDS AND PHRASES - “to the person making the decision” – “engaging with the applicant and the application” – “material that is in the Secretary’s possession or control”

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal had a proper basis to make adverse credibility findings – whether failure to consider relevant material – unreasonableness – whether denial of procedural fairness – whether the Tribunal misapplied ss 5J and 36(2)(aa) of the Act – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – student visa – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing student visa – whether Tribunal failed to give procedural fairness to the applicant – whether Tribunal erred in determining applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant under cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – consideration of typographical error – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – student visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – genuine temporary entrant criterion – consideration of Direction 69 factors – no formally articulated grounds of review – where self-represented applicant accepts no error at the hearing – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed

MIGRATION LAW – judicial review of decisions of the Administrative Review Tribunal to not grant Child (Migrant) (Class AH) visas – sponsor and five visa applicants – assessment of the sponsor and applicant’s evidence – Tribunal relied on unwarranted assumption – assumption was material to decision – Tribunal misapplied regulation 1.14(b) – application allowed  

MIGRATION – Student visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal was correct when determining that it had no jurisdiction – whether the Tribunal ought to have reinstated the applicant’s review application – whether the Tribunal was required to invite the applicant to attend a hearing before it – whether the Tribunal’s decision was illogical, irrational or unreasonable – no jurisdictional error – explanation regarding Ministerial intervention – application dismissed.

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

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) – whether the Secretary’s referral of material under s 473CB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was affected by relevant error due to omission of a letter making protection claims – materiality – application succeeds 

INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – failure to comply with a compliance notice – application for imposition of pecuniary penalties – consideration of factors relevant to penalty – pecuniary penalties ordered.