Judgments

MIGRATION – judicial review – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa – genuine temporary entrant criterion in cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – whether the Administrative Review Tribunal in applying the factors in Direction No. 108 failed to consider or overlooked the applicant’s reasons and circumstances – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant a protection visa – whether Tribunal made irrational findings - whether Tribunal failed to give proper consideration to the risk of harm to women in India - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.     

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – whether Tribunal complied with s 425 of the Act – whether Tribunal erred in making a decision on the review without taking any further action to enable applicant to appear – whether Tribunal was legally unreasonable – s 426A of the Act - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) – whether the IAA’s decision was legally unreasonable – contended issues with interpretation – whether the IAA’s decision was otherwise affected by legally relevant error – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa - Application for judicial review – Whether applicant given meaningful opportunity to present evidence – Whether failure to provide procedural fairness – Application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – JUDICIAL REVIEW – Extension of time – Where the delay is long – Where there is no satisfactory explanation for the delay – Where the proposed ground does not have reasonable prospects of success – An extension of time not needed in the interests of justice – Application for extension of time dismissed.

MIGRATION – JUDICIAL REVIEW – Whether the Applicant gave the Minister evidence of financial capacity under cl. 500.214(3) of Sch. 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 – Where the Tribunal was to apply the laws governing the exercise of its powers in force at the time of the Tribunal’s decision – Whether as a matter of jurisdictional fact the Tribunal required in writing the Applicant to give to it evidence of financial capacity under cl. 500.214(3) – Held Tribunal’s decision that the Applicant did not give it evidence of financial capacity which met the requirements in the legislative instrument was reasonable in the legal sense – Application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant student visa – Tribunal satisfied there was evidence applicant gave bogus document to Department in relation to visa application – Tribunal reasonably suspected bank statement showing funds in account was counterfeit – whether error by Tribunal in finding that it “reasonably suspects” document was counterfeit – Tribunal relied on investigative report – whether Tribunal’s reliance on investigative report was unreasonable – Tribunal accepted bank statement was issued by bank – whether bank statement issued by bank could be counterfeit – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION LAW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – Where the Applicant is a citizen of Sri Lanka and of Tamil ethnicity – Whether the Immigration Assessment Authority failed to consider claims or integers of his claims – Whether the Authority failed to consider the claim that on return to Sri Lanka Tamil detainees face discriminatory mistreatment by prison officials – Whether the Authority failed to consider a claim of the Applicant’s particular vulnerability because of his past mistreatment by Sri Lankan authorities and that any display of that vulnerability on his return to Sri Lanka may attract further attention and suspicion – Whether the Authority mischaracterised the Applicant’s lawyers representations as “mere submissions” when it ought to have treated those representations as “corroborative evidence” of the Applicant’s vulnerability – Application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Subclass 500 (Student) visa – not open to conduct merits review of Tribunal decision – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Safe Haven Enterprise (Subclass 790) visa - Application for judicial review – Whether the Immigration Assessment Authority failed to consider new information– Consideration of physical evidence provided at hearing before the delegate – Whether assessment of applicant’s claims had been adversely impacted by findings of credibility – Unreasonable or illogical reasoning – Application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa - Application for judicial review - Whether Tribunal failed to substantively engage with application for adjournment – Whether procedural fairness denied – Whether applicants were put on notice of the determinative issue on review - Application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant a protection visa – whether Tribunal made irrational findings - whether Tribunal failed to give proper consideration to the risk of harm to women in India - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.     

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – whether Tribunal complied with s 425 of the Act – whether Tribunal erred in making a decision on the review without taking any further action to enable applicant to appear – whether Tribunal was legally unreasonable – s 426A of the Act - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant student visa – whether Tribunal erred in finding applicant not a temporary entrant under cl 500.212(a) – whether Tribunal erred in its findings regarding the extent of the applicant's personal ties to his home country – application of Direction 69 - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Interlocutory mandatory injunction – Serious question to be tried – Balance of convenience – Application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Review Tribunal cancelling student visa – whether Tribunal erred in exercising discretionary power to cancel visa – applicant did not comply with condition of visa – whether Tribunal failed to consider substantially articulated claim – whether reasoning process of Tribunal was not intelligible – application dismissed.

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the Tribunal overlooked claims and evidence submitted by the applicant regarding the situation with his intended wife being an incentive for return to his home country – where the Tribunal instead considered that the applicant had given evidence that he was “not in a relationship” – where the Tribunal then relied upon a finding that the applicant’s ties home would not provide sufficient incentive for return – writs issued.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the applicant failed to appear at a listing before the Court relating to her judicial review application – application dismissed pursuant to r 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth). 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to affirm decision to refuse student visa – whether the primary applicant meets genuine temporary entrant criterion – where Tribunal carefully engaged with visa criterion – no error identified – application dismissed with costs.

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal misconstrued or misapplied the concept of “significant harm” – whether the Tribunal’s decision was affected by bias – whether the Tribunal’s decision was affected by any other legally relevant error – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – applicant absent from Court hearing – dismissal for non-appearance.

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Review Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – applicant requested hearing on papers – whether error by Tribunal in acceding to applicant’s request to make decision without holding hearing - application dismissed.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Re-opening of liability hearing – principles concerning re-opening – factors for consideration – whether admission of document into was irregular – where alleged fraud, misrepresentation and perjury concerning matters in the document – where alleged incompetence of lawyers – whether prejudice to other party – case management considerations – whether associated jurisdiction to be exercised in relation to new or revised claims.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Discovery of documents – principles in relation to discovery in this Court – where failure of application to re-open means that single document of which discovery sought is irrelevant.

INDUSTRIAL LAW – General protections dismissal claim – Interlocutory Application – Where applicant made a general protections application involving dismissal to the Fair Work Commission – Where the Fair Work Commission did not issue a certificate pursuant to s 368(3)(a) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – Where the applicant purported to file a general protections Court application in the absence of the certificate – Whether the Applicant’s dismissal-related pleadings should be struck out – the Court is jurisdictionally barred from considering any general protections dismissal claim – the Applicant’s dismissal-related pleadings are struck out. 

FAIR WORK – Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – Compliance Notice – whether validly issued – reasonable belief of Fair Work Inspector. 

INDUSTRIAL LAW – application for relief for alleged contraventions of s 340(1), s 351(1), and s 352 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) – whether the applicant exercised any one of the 24 classes of workplace rights on any one of the 188 occasions on which the applicant alleges he had exercised such rights throughout his employment with the respondent – whether the applicant was disabled – whether the first respondent took adverse action against the applicant by threatening on three separate occasions to dismiss the applicant if the applicant were to lodge a workers compensation claim – whether the first respondent had taken adverse action by threatening certain consequences if the applicant kept on bringing up the need for third party HR assistance – whether, in contravention of s 340(1), s 351(1), and s 352 of the FW Act respectively, the first respondent terminated the applicant’s employment because the applicant had exercised workplace rights, was temporarily absent from work, or had a disability – whether the second respondent was a person involved within the meaning of s 550 of the FW Act in the first respondent’s alleged contraventions of s 340(1), s 351(1), and s 352 of the FW Act – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – application for judicial review – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming decision not to grant Protection (subclass 866) visa – whether Tribunal failed to consider evidence –whether the Tribunal failed in its duty – whether the Tribunal failed to afford procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Protection (subclass 866) visa – judicial review – application for the review of a Registrar's decision – out of time – extension of time granted –no real or genuine dispute that resolvable in an applicant’s favour – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – application for judicial review – Protection (Class XA) (Subclass 866) visa – Administrative Appeals Tribunal not satisfied that applicant is a person to whom Australia owes protection obligations as outlined in s 36(2)(a) or (aa) – delegate’s decision to refuse the grant of the visa affirmed – whether Tribunal’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – apacplication for judicial review – Protection (Class XA) (Subclass 866) visa – Administrative Appeals Tribunal not satisfied that applicant is a person to whom Australia owes protection obligations as outlined in s 36(2)(a) or (aa) – delegate’s decision to refuse the grant of the visa affirmed – whether Tribunal’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – ex-tempore – judicial review – application for the review of a Registrar's decision – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (Subclass 500) visa – applicant not enrolled in a course of study – no real or genuine dispute that resolvable in an applicant’s favour – no reasonable prospect of success – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION –Ex-tempore – judicial review – application for the review of a Registrar's decision – Employer Nomination (Class EN) (Subclass 186) visa –no approved nomination – no real or genuine dispute that resolvable in an applicant’s favour – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION LAW – where all of the grounds of review were unparticularised – where the applicant was in default at the time of the hearing before the Court - where it was impossible for the Court to properly adjudicate upon the applicant’s claims – where no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Whether Tribunal applied proper statutory test – whether applicant denied procedural fairness.  

MIGRATION – protection visa – judicial review of decision of Immigration Assessment authority not to grant visas – whether Authority’s decision or reasoning processes were irrational or illogical – whether potential change in diplomatic position relevant to assessment of future risk –  application dismissed.

MIGRATION – costs – application for costs fixed in an amount above scale – fixed costs order made.

MIGRATION – judicial review – application to review decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) – where delegate of the Minister refused to grant the Applicant a visa – where the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the delegate of the Minister – whether the Tribunal erred – HELD no error by the Tribunal – application dismissed with costs. 

HUMAN RIGHTS – practice and procedure – application for leave to file amended statement of claim – whether proposed amended statement of claim pleads reasonable causes of action that are not pleaded in the current statement of claim – leave to file an amended statement of claim refused subject to the particulars to one paragraph of the proposed amended statement of claim being treated as particulars to a paragraph of the current statement of claim.  

HUMAN RIGHTS – practice and procedure - application by the respondent to dismiss the proceeding on the ground that the applicant’s litigation guardian allegedly defaulted on multiple occasions and on the ground that the manner in which the litigation guardian has conducted the proceeding is an abuse of process of the court and vexatious – application for dismissal of the proceeding is dismissed.  

HUMAN RIGHTS – practice and procedure – where in oral submissions counsel for the respondent without having cross-examined the applicant’s legally unrepresented litigation guardian imputed that, in her dealings with the Court, the litigation guardian had been untruthful, had told lies, and had uttered falsehoods – whether the respondent gave fair notice of its intention to make such imputations against the litigation guardian – fair notice not given - where in any event the unrepresented litigation guardian was not cross-examined and, for that reason, she was not confronted with the imputations that were in fact made – whether in these circumstances the question of dishonesty was properly raised – question of dishonesty not properly raised.

CONSUMER LAW – Application for orders under s 101 of the National Credit Code to seize the vehicle – Costs.

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant Medical Treatment (Visitor) (class UB) Medical Treatment (subclass 602) visa – whether Tribunal afforded applicant procedural fairness – whether Tribunal had jurisdiction - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.   

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to restrain legal practitioners from acting for the applicant – where a former solicitor from the applicant’s representative firm had previously worked for the respondents – whether the applicant has an unfair forensic advantage – interlocutory application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal – application for review of a Registrar’s decision – no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – application dismissed pursuant to r 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth). 

MIGRATION – judicial review application – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant Training (class GF) Training (subclass 407) visa – whether Tribunal provided detailed reasons of the genuine position assessment of the second training visa - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority failed to consider a claim – whether the Authority was unreasonable or illogical – whether the Authority misunderstood or misapplied s.473DD(b)(ii) of the Migration Act 1958 regarding credible personal information.

MIGRATION – extension of time – applicant filed 1 day out of time – Subclass 573 Higher Education Sector visa – where Administrative Appeal Tribunal affirmed the decision of the first respondent to cancel the applicant’s visa – whether the Tribunal failed to accord the applicant procedural fairness – where grounds largely unparticularised – found no unreasonableness, irrationality or illogicality in the Tribunal’s decision  – found grounds of substantive application not reasonably arguable – found it not in the interests of the administration of justice that there be an extension of time – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) – Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) (subclass 602) visa application – whether the applicant was a genuine temporary entrant for the purposes of medical treatment– whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to medical documents before it – whether the Tribunal incorrectly had regard to applicant’s visa application history – no jurisdictional error on behalf of the Tribunal established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – Whether Immigration Assessment Authority erred by not being satisfied the applicant would be at risk of serious harm – Whether assessment to consider new information properly made. 

MIGRATION: Student visa - decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal correctly applied criterion requiring applicant to demonstrate English language proficiency – whether an adjournment should have been granted – application dismissed.  

MIGRATION- Student visa – judicial review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal - whether telephone hearing was procedurally unfair - whether relevant considerations taken into account by Tribunal – whether decision legally unreasonable - whether bias demonstrated by Tribunal including by making a quick decision – application dismissed.