Judgments

Division 2 - General federal law

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Carer visa – grounds seeking impermissible merits review. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to affirm cancellation of Skilled Recognised Graduate visa – common ground that visa application attached bogus documents – whether bogus document ‘given or caused to be given’– whether applicant victim of fraud by migration agent - knowledge of visa applicant – whether Tribunal failed to make obvious inquiries – whether Tribunal considered all relevant facts and arguments – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

FAIR WORK – application for extension of time – originating application filed two days out of time – delay attributed to technical issues with electronic lodgment system – principles for granting an extension of time considered – reasonable explanation for delay – no prejudice to respondents – extension of time granted pursuant to s 370 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – review of summary dismissal by Registrar – protection visa application – where Tribunal dismissed application after applicant failed to appear at hearing – where applicant failed to apply for reinstatement within prescribed period – whether application has no reasonable prospects of success – application for review dismissed

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION - protection visa – application for judicial review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether jurisdictional error arose due to delay between Tribunal hearing and decision – whether procedural fairness not afforded because of non-disclosure of s438 Certificate – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection (Subclass 866) visa - Extension of Time – Delay of 1418 days – Explanation for delay inadequate - Extension of time dismissed – Application for judicial review – Application for judicial review had no arguable merit. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming a decision not to grant the applicants protection visas – whether the Tribunal inappropriately relied on delay in making a protection visa application in rejecting the claims for protection – whether the Tribunal unreasonably failed to exercise its discretion in s 424 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to get further evidence from the applicants – whether the Tribunal failed to act in a way that is fair and just by not inviting them to comment on the delay – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed

Judgment published date:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Fair work – Application for an interlocutory application seeking orders in the nature of an anti-suit injunction to restrain the respondent from taking steps to pursue its application filed with the Fair Work Commission until the final determination of the originating application –whether applicant has made out prima facie case – whether balance of convenience favours grant of interlocutory relief – application for interlocutory relief granted. 
Judgment published date:
FAIR WORK – JURISDICTION – Where under s. 365(a) of the FW Act if “a person has been dismissed” and the person alleges that the dismissal was in contravention of the general protections in Part 3.1 of the FW Act the person may apply to the Fair Work Commission to deal with the dispute – Where the Applicant applied to the FWC before the date of his dismissal - Held the court lacks jurisdiction as to the dismissal dispute.
 
FAIR WORK – GENERAL PROTECTIONS – Whether six communications were “complaints” within the meaning of s. 341(1)(c) of the FW Act – Held except for two complaints the communications were not complaints within the meaning of s. 341(1)(c) – In any event the Respondent dismissed the Applicant because of concerns about the Applicant’s performance and not because of complaints – General protections claim dismissed.
 
FAIR WORK – NOTICE – Where the First Respondent admitted that it contravened s. 44 of the FW Act by failing to give the Applicant notice of the termination of his employment or a payment in lieu of notice in accordance with s. 117(2) – Declaration made – Orders made for a further hearing as to penalty and any consequential matters. 
Judgment published date:

FAIR WORK – application for pecuniary penalties and declaration of contravention of s 502 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – where permit holder hindered or obstructed union official in exercise of rights under Part 3-4 by denial of access to areas where employees took meal or other breaks – pecuniary penalty imposed. 

Judgment published date:

CHILD SUPPORT- Appeal – Notice of Appeal failed to establish that there had been an error in law made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Appeal dismissed – Costs reserved pending written submissions.    

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – general protections – adverse action – workplace rights – whether employee exercised workplace rights by making a bullying complaint – whether employer took adverse action against employee – factual dispute as to character of the decision taken about the employee’s position – decision to make position redundant constituted adverse action within the meaning of s 342 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) – whether adverse action taken because of the exercise of workplace rights – reverse onus of proof under s 361(1) of the FW Act- evidence of decision maker as to reasons for taking adverse action accepted – where satisfied that the adverse action was not taken because of the exercise of the established workplace right – reverse onus discharged – general protections claim dismissed  INDUSTRIAL LAW  – alleged contraventions of s 50 of the FW act for contravening terms of the Dandenong Casey General Practice Association Certified Agreement 2009-2019 –  whether employer failed to consult about major change – whether employer failed to take all reasonably practicable steps to provide a working environment that is safe and without risks to health – contraventions established – declarations made and compensation awarded – the question of penalty to be determined at a separate hearing. 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work – failure to comply with compliance notice – application for civil penalties and compensation under s 545(2)(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – where respondents failed to engage in the proceeding and declarations of contravention made on the basis of their deemed admissions – where first respondent remains registered – where no evidence of contrition or cooperation with regulator – where need for specific and general deterrence – jurisdiction under s 545(2)(b) not engaged where no quantifiable loss causally linked to the contraventions – order for penalties and for the first respondent to take the steps required by the compliance notice pursuant to s 545(2)(d). 

Judgment published date:

FAIR WORK – costs application – application under s 570(2)(b) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether unreasonable act or omission – no order as to costs. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of a decision made by the Administrative Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal misapplied the ‘real chance’ test – whether the Tribunal was required to apply the ‘what if I am wrong?’ test – whether the Tribunal appropriately took into account any doubt in its factual findings – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

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 Tribunal made unreasonable findings without evidence and without asking itself what the consequences would be if an alternative interpretation were correct – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – extension of time – no appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – application dismissed for non-appearance 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). 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Practice and Procedure – applicants seeking declarations of contravention of civil remedy provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – application for default judgment against respondents in circumstances where they failed to comply with Court orders and to appear at hearing – default judgment entered in respect of applicants’ claim – respondents’ defence struck out and cross-claim dismissed – declarations of contravention – compensation awarded for underpayments and loss of entitlements – issue of penalty to be determined on the papers. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for an extension of time – decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal– protection visa – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness – explanation for delay unsatisfactory – underlying application for judicial review lacks merit – extension of time refused. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for an extension of time – decision made by the Immigration Assessment Authority – protection visa – whether the Authority failed to properly consider the applicant’s claims – whether the Authority should have considered new information – whether the Authority came to an unreasonable conclusion – underlying application for judicial review lacks merit – extension of time refused. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Where Tribunal refused to grant the applicant a protection visa – where the applicant contends the Tribunal was unreasonable and/or failed to take into account a relevant consideration by failing to acknowledge deficiencies in the hearing process – where the applicant contends the Tribunal was unreasonable in having regard to evidence before the delegate of which there was no evidence – where the applicant contends the Tribunal failed to make a determination regarding which country was the country of nationality of the applicant under s 5H – whether the Tribunal was unreasonable by not considering claims of harm raised in a country that is not the applicant’s receiving country – no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

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 Tribunal failed to consider the evidence given by the applicant – whether the Tribunal failed to consider all of the claims advanced by the applicant – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – student visa refusal – where Tribunal found no jurisdiction – no jurisdiction due to invalid application – application for extension of time to seek judicial review of Tribunal decision – delay not significant – no specific prejudice to the Minister – limited arguable case of jurisdictional error – application for extension of time refused. 

Judgment published date:
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS – jurisdiction of the Court to hear a claim for damages under s.267(4) of the Australian Consumer Law – where damages sought exceed $750,000 – consideration of application of s.138A – where Applicants seek unparticularised damages for alleged breaches of Subdivisions A and B of Division 1 of Part 3-2 – Applicants granted leave to re-plead.
 
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for transfer to Federal Court – consideration of factors relevant to the exercise of the discretion – no transfer order made. 
Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for an extension of time – substantive application seeking judicial review of the decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – protection visa – delay of 40 days – where new DFAT country information published around 11 months before Authority’s decision – whether Authority bound by Ministerial Direction no. 56 to consider most recent country information – whether unreasonable not to consider new information – whether arguable grounds exist – extension of time granted. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – medical treatment visa – application for reinstatement of application for judicial review – whether reasonable excuse for non-appearance at hearing – whether reasonable excuse for delay in bringing application for reinstatement – whether reasonably arguable grounds of review – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) (subclass 500) – judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for an extension of time to bring judicial proceedings under s 477(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether extension of time is necessary in the interests of the administration of justice – length of delay – prospects of success – application refused.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether Immigration Assessment Authority failed to engage with relevant considerations and to afford natural justice.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – extension of time in which to seek judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal not to grant the applicant a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) (subclass 602) visa – applicant is a support person of the primary applicant in a related application – length and explanation for delay weigh in favour of the applicant – no jurisdictional error in the Tribunal’s decision not to grant a medical treatment visa to the primary applicant– no utility in granting leave for an extension of time – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – Visitor (Tourist) (subclass 600) visa – whether this Court has jurisdiction to review the Department of Home Affairs decision that an application for a visitor visa was invalid – whether to grant an extension of time to the applicant to bring an application to challenge the Department’s decision that an application for a visitor visa was invalid – delay of five years – extension of time refused in the interests of the administration of justice – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – refusal to grant the applicant a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa – whether the Tribunal failed to consider a claim or an integer of a claim – whether the Tribunal breached s 360 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and/or was legally unreasonable in failing to ask the applicant questions about her relationship with her elderly mother – whether the Tribunal failed to give genuine consideration to the applicant’s representative’s request to ask questions about the applicant’s relationship with her mother – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application made by applicant for recusal on the basis of apprehended bias – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether conclusions of the Immigration Assessment Authority were unreasonable, irrational and illogical by reason of relying on discrepancies in applicant’s accounts in circumstances where he claimed poor memory. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for review of a registrar’s decision – protection visa – whether the registrar erred in dismissing the application for judicial review – whether the underlying application has reasonable prospects of success – where the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found it did not have jurisdiction – application for review of a registrar’s decision dismissed – orders of the judicial registrar affirmed.   

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – student visa – whether the Tribunal failed to comply with procedural fairness obligations – whether the Tribunal erroneously relied on the applicant’s enrolment cancellation – application dismissed.   

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for review of a registrar’s decision – employer nomination visa – whether the registrar erred in dismissing the applicant’s application for judicial review – whether the application for judicial review has reasonable prospects of success – where there was no valid employer nomination before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for review of a registrar’s decision dismissed – orders of the judicial registrar affirmed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – application for reinstatement – where judicial review application dismissed following non-attendance by applicant at hearing – whether applicant provided satisfactory explanation for failing to appear at hearing - whether judicial review application has reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:
MIGRATION – Application for reinstatement – where judicial review application dismissed following non-attendance by applicant at hearing – whether applicant provided satisfactory explanation for failure to appear at hearing - whether judicial review application has reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed
 
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bare and unsatisfactory medical certificates – need for medical certificate or medical evidence to explain why medical condition prevented applicant from attending or participating in hearing in person or by video link.
Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for an extension of time – decision made by the Administrative Review Tribunal – student visa – where the Tribunal made administrative errors – reasonable explanation for delay – underlying application has limited prospects of success – extension of time refused.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Whether findings of Tribunal failed to engage with evidence – whether identified inconsistencies were based on minor and immaterial discrepancies.   

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Student (Subclass 500) visa refused – False or misleading information in application for visa held in the 12 months before application made – Public interest criteria not met – Circumstances to justify waiver of public interest criteria do not exist – No jurisdictional error established – Application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Fair Work Act proceeding – application by applicants to appear and give evidence at trial via video-link – where one applicant resides in Italy and the other in Switzerland – where applicants claim hardship – where applicants contend small quantum of claim disproportionate to travel costs and other inconvenience – where applicants seek relief including imposition of civil penalties – where events occurred nearly 7 years ago – where identity of employer disputed and respondent denies connection with applicants – extensive cross-examination expected – discussion of principles relevant to court’s exercise of discretion – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether Tribunal failed to consider a claim or an integer of a claim – procedural fairness – whether Tribunal relied on incorrect information – misunderstanding of Court’s jurisdiction – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant applicant student visa – criterion for visa that applicant must give evidence of English language proficiency to Minister “if required to do so by the Minister” – Tribunal found criterion not satisfied because applicant did not give evidence – whether Tribunal must require or request specified evidence – whether Tribunal required or requested specified evidence – application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Temporary Graduate (class VC) (Post-Study Work) (subclass 485) visa-Tribunal affirmed decision of delegate – Applicant had not met cl 485.212(1)(a) criterion – English test results revoked after date of visa application – Consideration of whether requirements of cl 485.212(1)(a)(i) met at time application made – Whether test undertaken after visa application made of a kind contemplated by cl 485.212(1)(a) – No jurisdictional error established – Application dismissed.

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – student visa – decision of the then Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to consider evidence – whether the Tribunal breached s 359AA – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant material – whether inconsistent findings – no evidence – relevance of PAM guidelines – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:
CONSUMER LAW – interlocutory application –repossession of motor vehicles over which the applicant claims to hold a security interest – motor vehicles registered on the Personal Property Securities Register in accordance with s 123(1) of the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth).
 
CORPORATIONS LAW – leave under s 471B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to commence or continue proceedings.
 
COURTS AND TRIBUNALS – associated jurisdiction – nature of Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2)’s associated jurisdiction pursuant to s 134 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) in respect of matters arising under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
 
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – joinder of additional parties and amendment. 
Judgment published date:

BANKRUPTCY – Application to review a registrar’s decision – review application made out of time – where the applicant is 417 days out of time – application dismissed and bankruptcy notice not set aside.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for an extension of time to file a general protections court application under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – extension of time granted.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the applicant failed to appear at a listing before the Court relating to his 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).