Please enter your search query in the form below to search judgments of the Federal Circuit Court

using
Number of results per page:
Austlii Logo

Judgments search is powered by Austlii


Note: Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish or distribute a report of a case or part of a case, including information contained in a Judgment, which identifies parties, related or associated persons, witnesses or others involved in the case. A breach of the section is a criminal offence. The section also sets out certain limited defences to criminal liability. An example is where the Court has expressly authorised the publication.

  • Asghar v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 716

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Student (Temporary)(Class TU) (subclass 500) visa – delegate cancelled visa – whether ground for cancellation made out – whether visa should be cancelled – no arguable case – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • MIJA Pty Ltd & Ors v Gravener [2020] FCCA 681

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work Act – costs – where a costs applications was made after the judgment was delivered – no costs awarded.

  • Singh v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 522

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) (Subclass 820) visa – whether the Tribunal did not take into consideration the entire chain of circumstances which constitute compelling reasons under Schedule 3 criteria of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal did not give any weight to the emotional and financial hardship of the applicant – whether the Tribunal did not contend the merits of the application –Whether the Tribunal was unfair, irrational or incomprehensible in making its decision – whether the Tribunal made any jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error made out – the application is dismissed.

  • ANL17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 637

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Act) in relation to decision of the second respondent (Authority) affirming decision of delegate of first respondent not to grant applicant Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether it is arguable that when considering whether there were exceptional circumstances justifying the Authority considering new information the Authority considered whether the information, had it been known by the delegate, may have affected the consideration of the applicant’s claims – arguable the Authority did not do so and, for that reason, made a jurisdictional error – whether given the elements of the applicant’s claims for protection the Authority accepted it was not reasonably open to the Authority to conclude the applicant did not face a real risk of serious harm – reasonably open to so conclude – directions made for the filing of further submissions.

    MIGRATION – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for leave to rely on two additional grounds – whether proposed grounds sufficiently arguable to merit the granting of leave – one of the two grounds sufficiently arguable – leave granted to rely on one of the two additional grounds – directions made for the filing of further submissions.

  • KC & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 649

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a skilled work visa – principal applicant not having an approved sponsor at the time of the Tribunal decision – no jurisdictional error – observations on futility.

  • CBR17 & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 683

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming decision not to grant protection visa – whether Tribunal considered all of the applicants’ claims – whether the Tribunal acted fairly – no jurisdictional error.

  • CCZ17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 696

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming decision not to grant protection visa – unparticularised claims of errors of law – whether Tribunal relied on findings unsupported by evidence – no jurisdictional error.

  • BNL17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 435

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Sri Lanka – applicant disbelieved in part and other fears found not to be well-founded – whether the Authority made legally unreasonable finding or overlooked an integer of the applicant’s claims considered – jurisdictional error established.

  • Peraj v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 712

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Judicial Review - decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for Subclass 500 Student visa – whether the criterion in the migration regulations Public Interest Criterion 4020 is met – where information given about the applicant’s employment in Italy was an essential or necessary element of deciding whether he was a genuine temporary entrant – where the Tribunal found applicant provided information that is false, misleading or implausible – where this was a conclusion open to the Tribunal in the circumstances – application dismissed.

  • Newman v Soldier.ly Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 706

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for default judgment against the respondent – whether because the respondent did not comply with orders that it file and serve a defence and evidence the respondent is a party in default – orders made.

  • CZA19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 686

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – extension of time – Application 34 days late - Applicant citizen of Poland – fears retribution by government and organised crime figures for criminal acts committed in Poland – explanation for delay not accepted – application lacking merit – application refused.

  • CMS18 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 688

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Safe Haven Enterprise (subclass 790) visa – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness – whether the IAA displayed bias – whether the IAA asked a wrong question – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • EFG18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 430

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Lebanon – applicant disbelieved in critical respects – whether the Tribunal decision is vitiated by unreasonable fact finding considered – error made not material hence not going to jurisdiction.

  • AXL18 & Ors v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 693

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where applicant claims new information ought to have been considered – where alleged misinterpretation in interview with the Authority – s.473DD criteria not satisfied regarding new information – evidence of misinterpretation not produced by applicant – failure to particularise any alleged jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • GBY18 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 675

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Protection visa – whether the Tribunal was unfair – whether the Tribunal ignored material it should have considered – whether the Tribunal made a decision where there was no supporting evidence – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Yung & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 680

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) – whether the Tribunal erred by taking irrelevant considerations into account – whether the Tribunal erred by failing to take relevant considerations into account – whether the Tribunal erred by failing to apply the correct and relevant test for evidence under Public Interest Criterion 4005 of Schedule 4 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the statutory criteria by reference to the hypothetical person test – ground not made out – no jurisdictional error revealed – application dismissed.

  • EEP18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 411

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Sri Lanka – applicant disbelieved in some respects and his fears found not to be well-founded – whether the Authority failed to consider a material claim as part of a cumulative assessment considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • DYJ18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 624

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for protection visa – no appearance by the applicant – application dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).

  • AVC19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 431

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for reinstatement where original application previously dismissed for non-appearance under r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority failed to consider evidence before it – whether the Authority provided reasons for its decision – whether the Authority properly applied s 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • CKZ19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 284

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Protection (Class XA) visa – whether the Tribunal failed to properly assess the applicant’s risk of harm – whether the Tribunal failed to take into account a relevant consideration – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • BBV17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 674

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Persecution – review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) decision – visa – protection visa – refusal – no matter of principle.

  • Zhang v Cheng (No.2) [2020] FCCA 507

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    BANKRUPTCY – Application for a sequestration order – whether the Court has the power to make an order nunc pro tunc – whether the Court should go behind the judgment debt – sequestration order made.

  • CWW18 & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 26

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decisions – refusal of protection visas – applicants claiming a fear of harm in Iran – principal applicant disbelieved in critical respects and other fears found not to be well-founded – whether the principal applicant is an unauthorised maritime arrival considered – whether the Authority erred in considering whether to accept new information or in considering the applicant’s data breach claims considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • AKJ18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 3

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Iran – applicant’s fears found not to be well-founded – whether the applicant is an unauthorised maritime arrival and whether the Authority erred in considering whether to receive new information considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union & Ors v CEM International Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 644

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Claimed applicants took industrial action not authorised or agreed to by employer – alleged contraventions of section 19(1)(c) of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) established against all applicants – applicants undertook industrial action within meaning of term under Act – insufficient evidence to infer implied authority – application dismissed.

  • Thai v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 389

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of partner visas – Tribunal not satisfied that the couple were in a genuine spousal relationship – whether the Tribunal complied with its statutory procedural fairness obligations considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • Sutiawan v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 549

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a student visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • Babajee v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 655

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa – no matters of principle – application dismissed.

  • Singh v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 608

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Partner (Temporary)(Class UK) visa – whether the Tribunal’s assessment and reasoning process was erroneous – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably in not giving adequate weight to the health condition of the sponsor – whether the Tribunal failed to take a relevant consideration into account when determining the existence of a compelling reason – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Zhao v TSS & Associates Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 595

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Applicant seeks to reinstate an Application dismissed on 25 February 2019 due to non-appearance by the Applicant – the regrettable delay of over a year is prejudicial to the Respondent – inappropriate to reinstate the proceeding – Application in a Case dismissed.

  • Popovic v Downer EDI Engineering Electrical Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 607

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Termination of employment – no age discrimination held – no adverse action – no exercising of a workplace right – no coercion – no reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed.

  • Nelson (As Trustee) v Supple & Anor [2020] FCCA 597

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    BANKRUPTCY – Whether the First Respondent’s consideration he gave for the transfer was at least as valuable as the market value of the property – whether the transferee did not know and could not reasonably have inferred that the transferor’s main purpose in making the transfer was the purpose described in s.121(1)(b) – whether the transferee could not reasonably have inferred that at the time of the transfer the transferor was, or was about to become, insolvent – the relevant property would not have become part of the transferor’s estate and would not have been available to creditors if the property had not been transferred – the Second Respondent’s purpose in making the transfer was not to prevent the transferor’s property from becoming divisible amongst her creditors, or to hinder or delay the process of making the property available for division amongst her creditors – finding that the First Respondent did not know and could not reasonably have inferred that the purpose of the transfer was the impugned one and that he did not and could not reasonably have inferred that at the time of the transfer the transferor was about to become insolvent.

  • Mako v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 528

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa – application for reinstatement – whether the Tribunal failed to exercise its jurisdiction – whether the Tribunal failed to carry out its statutory task – whether the Tribunal failed to give proper, genuine and realistic consideration to the merits of the claims – whether the Tribunal made a jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error made out – application for reinstatement denied – application dismissed.

  • EIX18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 619

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV) – significant country information adopted by Authority – careful consideration of all evidence by Authority – findings of Authority open after all evidence weighed up – application dismissed.

  • CQM19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 502

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to relevant material – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant aspects of the applicant’s claim – whether the Tribunal determined the matter unreasonably, illogically, without intelligible justification or active intellectual consideration – whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the applicant was not a member of the same family unit as his mother – no jurisdictional error made out – third further amended application dismissed.

  • FTK18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 497

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a protection visa – application for extension of time – whether the Tribunal’s decision constitutes apprehended and/or actual bias – whether the Tribunal made adverse findings – whether the Tribunal complied with its procedural fairness obligations – whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error made out – application for extension of time dismissed.

  • FTK18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor (No.2) [2020] FCCA 518

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for re-instatement – whether the applicant alleges that it was procedurally unfair that he did not have access to an interpreter – whether the applicant alleges that it was procedurally unfair that he did not have access to a copy of written reasons – whether the applicant alleges that it was procedurally unfair that he did not have legal representation – whether the Federal Circuit Court denied the applicant procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error made out – the application for re-instatement is dismissed.

  • AWD19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 14

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Bangladesh – applicant not believed – whether the Tribunal made material factual errors considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • SZVYB v Minister for Immigration [2020] FCCA 587

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection not to waive a “no further stay condition” – whether the delegate misunderstood the grounds on which the waiver was sought – whether the delegate proceeded on a misunderstanding of the grounds on which the “no further stay condition” may be waived – application dismissed.

  • CCP17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 588

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to a decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (Authority) affirming decision not to grant a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority failed to consider relevant considerations – whether there was before the Authority new information which the Authority did not consider – no jurisdictional error.

  • Mann v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 600

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – The Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for Temporary Work (Skilled) (subclass 457) visa – whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error in hearing the application for review – whether the Tribunal made an error of law in deciding that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the application – no jurisdictional error made out – the application dismissed.

  • Alam v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 565

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) – Temporary Work (Skilled) (Subclass 457) Visa – where AAT found it had no jurisdiction to review decision pursuant to s.338(2)(d) – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • COY19 & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 429

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Protection (Class XA) visa – whether the Tribunal misconstrued or failed to consider the applicants’ claims or an integer thereof – whether the Tribunal misconstrued or failed to apply the relevant law or the correct law or test – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • ANS17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 625

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) – whether the IAA denied the applicant procedural fairness – ground not made out – no jurisdictional error revealed – application dismissed.

    PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Leave sought to amend application – proposed ground alleges the IAA’s rejection of one of the applicant’s claims was illogical and irrational – proposed ground the IAA’s rejection of one of the applicant’s claims gave rise to an apprehension of bias – proposed ground lacks requisite merit – leave refused.

  • United Voice v Paisley Park Early Learning Centres (SA) Pty Limited & Anor [2020] FCCA 578

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Right of entry – alleged contravention of section 502 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – hindering or obstruction of union official’s right to hold discussions in the work place – whether parties failed to reach agreement as to location of such discussions – application of section 492 of the Act – contraventions established – penalty to be imposed.

  • Salazar & Salazar [2020] FCCA 330

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Leave to commence property settlement proceedings eight months out of time – summary dismissal – initiating application and response dismissed.

  • Kaur & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 629

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa – English language proficiency test failed – no matters of principle – application dismissed

  • FZP18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 605

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for Temporary Protection Visa – inconsistencies and implausibility in applicant’s claims – no failure on the part of the Authority to relevantly engage in a proper consideration of all aspects of the applicant’s claims – findings of Authority open on the evidence before it – application dismissed.

  • DUO16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor (No.2) [2020] FCCA 604

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for protection visa – Authority not satisfied that claimed religious conversion to Christianity was genuine – findings open on the evidence before the authority – application dismissed.

  • DUN16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 601

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for protection visa – inconsistencies in applicant’s claims – country information supportive of there being no well-founded fear of persecution should the applicant be returned to country of origin – findings of Authority open on the evidence before it – application dismissed.

  • DND19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 576

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • DKK19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 545

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • CEW18 v Minister for Immigration [2020] FCCA 10

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision of a delegate of the Minister that the applicant is an excluded fast track applicant – applicant found to have provided a bogus identity document – whether the finding was a jurisdictional fact considered - whether the delegate made irrational or illogical findings considered – no jurisdictional error established.

  • Bevan v Souter [2020] FCCA 577

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application for breach of terms of modern award and national employment standards arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 – termination of employment – failure to pay employee’s accrued leave entitlements – principles to be applied to undefended proceedings – accessorial liability – matters to be considered.

  • ARO17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 631

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Persecution – review of Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) decision – visa – protection visa – refusal.

    ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Allegation that the IAA’s decision was unreasonable and consequently affected by jurisdictional error.

  • Singh v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 580

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Regional Employer Nomination (Class RN) (subclass 187) visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the applicant had no approved nomination – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • NANJ v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 210

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant seeking complementary protection based upon a fear of harm in Bangladesh – applicant not believed – whether the Tribunal overlooked relevant considerations or made irrational factual findings or denied the applicant procedural fairness considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • Murni & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 579

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the applicants consented to the Tribunal deciding the application without a hearing – whether the applicants were denied procedural fairness – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • Islam & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 599

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – student visa – intention to stay in Australia on a temporary basis – no matters of principle – application dismissed.

  • DET19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 556

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application on account of the applicant’s non attendance.

  • CFO17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 192

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Sri Lanka – applicant believed but his fears found not to be well-founded – whether there were new issues that the Authority should have put to the applicant for comment considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • BVI18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 9

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Sri Lanka – applicant disbelieved in significant respects and other fears found not to be well-founded – whether the Authority failed to deal with a claim arising out of the Departmental data breach in 2014 or whether the review by the Authority was disabled by the failure of the Secretary to provide the Authority with the record of an interview conducted with the applicant in Nauru considered – jurisdictional error established.

  • ATK17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 544

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection – temporary protection visa – refusal – review of Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) decision – whether exceptional circumstances existed justifying the consideration by IAA of new information – whether s.473DD(b)(ii) referred to matters which the IAA was obliged to take into account when considering whether exceptional circumstances existed.

  • Yim v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 532

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Partner visa – cancellation – whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to a relevant consideration – whether legal unreasonableness.

  • Sharma v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 598

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Regional employer nomination visa – no matters of principle – application dismissed.

  • Luo v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 575

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness – ground not made out – no jurisdictional error revealed – application dismissed.

  • EKO19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 613

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Lack of particularity in grounds for review – failure by lawyers for the first respondent to seek interlocutory orders, at an early time, to regularise matters relevant to the provision of particulars – matter adjourned for the purpose of particulars being provided.

  • CFD18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 457

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority misinterpreted s.473DD of the Act – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Arshad v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 536

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a student visa – applicant enrolled at the time of the Tribunal hearing but ceasing to be enrolled before the Tribunal decision – Tribunal basing its decision on the cessation of enrolment – no jurisdictional error.

  • In the matter of the Regulated Debtor’s Estate of Ronnie Bensimon [2020] FCCA 596

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    BANKRUPTCY – Application by bankrupt to travel overseas – Application opposed by Trustee in Bankruptcy – consideration of relevant matters – Application dismissed.

  • DCB19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 513

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • DAZ19 & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 509

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of protection visas – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • MNS Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister For Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 527

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for nomination of occupation under s.140GB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) – whether the AAT failed to consider evidence on the genuineness of the occupation – whether the AAT engaged in an active intellectual process – whether the error was material – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • ASO17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 567

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Safe Haven Enterprise Visa – refusal – review by Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) – whether IAA failed to consider a claim or an integer of a claim made by the visa applicant.

  • Kartar Investments Pty Ltd v Minister for Immigration & Anor and Goyal v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 5

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions – refusal of an employer nomination and refusal of an employment visa – no approved nomination at the time of the visa decision – whether the Tribunal should have awaited judicial review of the nomination refusal or otherwise fell into jurisdictional error considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • EMS18 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 548

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection Visa – whether Immigration Assessment authority’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – where no error established in Immigration Assessment authority’s decision – application dismissed

  • BYI19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 547

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection Visa – whether Immigration Assessment authority’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – where no error established in Immigration Assessment authority’s decision – application dismissed

  • Promsopa v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 546

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • Plaintiff P40/2019 & Ors v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCCA 568

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection Visa – whether Delegate’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – where no error established in Delegate’s decision – application dismissed.

  • CPR18 v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 552

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – protection visa – applicant convicted of drug trafficking related offences in Australia – whether the applicant faces risk of re-prosecution in home country – whether applicant faces risk of death penalty in home country – whether the Tribunal’s decision was infected with jurisdictional error because of a failure to correctly apply the Chinese Criminal Code and/or Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act 1987 – no jurisdictional error established – application for review dismissed with costs.

  • AML18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 525

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Safe Haven Enterprise visa – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – whether IAA erred when considering new information – whether IAA was biased – whether IAA asked a wrong question – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • Jethara v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 529

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION –Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of an employment visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no grounds of review – incompetent application.

  • Kaur & Ors v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 566

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Visas – student visas – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – reasonably satisfied that applicant was not enrolled in a course of study in Australia – no reasonable excuse for non-attendance at hearing – no arguable claim for the merits of the application – application in a case dismissed.

  • Russell v Bretesea Pty Ltd trading as Yes Lismore Optus Square & Anor [2019] FCCA 3335

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application seeking compensation for alleged contravention of ss.340 and 351 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – consideration of issuing of separation certificate – no contravention made out – application dismissed.

  • Fair Work Ombudsman v Northcoast Security Services Group Pty Ltd & Ors (No.3) [2020] FCCA 521

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Assessment of pecuniary penalties for involvement of directors in employer’s contraventions of s.45 and s.323(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) – orders for the payment of pecuniary penalties made.

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Remedies – Whether the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) can apply for and be granted orders under s.545(2)(b) of the FW Act awarding compensation in relation to employees who had been underpaid – assuming FWO can be granted such orders whether such orders can be granted in the form of an order requiring payment of compensation to the FWO on terms that if the amount for compensation is paid to the FWO the FWO would pay out of amount it received the persons on account of whom compensation has been assessed – assuming such orders can be granted whether any orders to that effect should be granted in the circumstances of this case – orders made.

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Remedies – Whether the loss for which an order for compensation can be made under s.545(2)(b) of the FW Act against a person involved in another’s contravention is limited to loss that is caused by that person’s conduct as an accessory – not so limited.

  • Benge & Anor v Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd (No.2) [2020] FCCA 515

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – Claims for relief under s.545 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by employees of respondent for amounts claimed to be due to them under their written employment contracts for pre-paid overtime not paid to them as and from 10 January 2016 in contravention of s.323 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – judgment answers questions dealing with the proper construction of the employment contracts – whether there were any valid variations to the employment contracts justifying the non-payment of pre-paid overtime as and from 10 January 2016 – whether in the circumstances the applicants consented to the termination and non-payment of pre-paid overtime by continuing to work for the respondent after the pre-paid overtime was terminated and not paid to them – whether the respondent repudiated the employment contracts by not paying pre-paid overtime to the applicants as and from 10 January 2016 – whether in the circumstances the applicants accepted any repudiation.

  • Bol v Thurairatnam [2020] FCCA 572

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    CONSUMER LAW – Leave granted to proceed against bankrupt respondent – default judgment against respondent – section 58(3)(b) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – false representation regarding securing a home loan – single mother of ten children.

  • COZ16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 514

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application to review decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – whether Authority failed to “properly” consider an integer of the Applicant’s claims such that it constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction.

  • BZV17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 504

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming decision not to grant applicant protection visa – whether the Tribunal made an error of fact – whether the error of fact was material – whether the Tribunal otherwise considered the applicant’s claims – no jurisdictional error.

  • CBA17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 511

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for leave to amend application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to a decision made by the Immigration Assessment Authority (Authority) affirming a decision not to grant the applicant a safe haven enterprise visa – whether adequate explanation given for not having applied for leave to amend by time provided for by previous order – whether proposed ground has sufficient merit to warrant leave – application for leave to amend refused – application dismissed.

  • Luo v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 373

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness – whether the Tribunal failed to take into account a relevant consideration – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • FNV17 & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 535

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for Protection (Class XA) visas – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably in considering the application for reinstatement – whether the Tribunal denied the applicants procedural fairness by reason of there being a reasonable apprehension of bias – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • DEL19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 524

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • CBI17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 554

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming decision to cancel Protection visa on the ground that applicant had provided incorrect information in connection with the application for a protection visa – whether Tribunal considered applicant’s evidence and circumstances – whether Tribunal biased – application dismissed.

  • BLV19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 506

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – interlocutory dismissal of show cause application – no arguable case of jurisdictional error.

  • ATX16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 167

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application in a case for reinstatement – whether there was a deliberate failure by the applicant not to appear – whether the grounds in the amended application have reasonable prospects of success – no utility in setting aside the Court’s orders – application in a case dismissed.

  • ATT20 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 499

    Published date: 16 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Partner visa – whether Tribunal failed to consider the combination of circumstances said to constitute compelling reasons not to apply Schedule 3 criteria.

  • BKD18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 530

    Published date: 12 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Decision of Immigration Assessment Authority – application for protection visa – where failure to particularise any alleged jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • Edgar v Norton Rose Fulbright Australia Services Pty Ltd & Ors (No.2) [2020] FCCA 520

    Published date: 12 Mar 2020

    PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Pleading – further and better particulars. INDUSTRIAL LAW – Whether s.361 of the Fair Work Act 2009, imposes a legal or evidentiary burden on a respondent.

  • Howard, Harkin and Kelly trading as Owen Hodge Lawyers v Faltas [2020] FCCA 185

    Published date: 12 Mar 2020

    BANKRUPTCY – Application for a sequestration order under s.27 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – whether a sequestration order should be made – no sufficient cause for why a sequestration order ought not to be made – sequestration order made.

  • DIB19 v Minister for Immigration [2020] FCCA 480

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for Bridging Visa dismissed –no denial of procedural fairness – invalid visa application – Temporary Safe Haven visa – no jurisdictional error found.

  • CMH17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 349

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision by Immigration Assessment Authority – whether Immigration Assessment Authority’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether the Immigration Assessment Authority failed to consider the accumulation of dangers that the Applicant may face in relocation – whether the Immigration Assessment Authority considered only if the Applicant was at risk of serious or significant harm in considering relocation – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • CKG17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 478

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision by Immigration Assessment Authority – whether Immigration Assessment Authority’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether Immigration Assessment Authority considered all claims made by the applicant – whether Immigration Assessment Authority’s findings were open to it – whether Immigration Assessment Authority erred in its consideration of the applicant’s vulnerabilities – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • BUB18 & Anor v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 395

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision by Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered all claims made by the applicant – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s findings were open to it – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal was biased – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • BWO19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 384

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision by Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal properly considered all evidence before it – whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred in failing to warn the applicant that legal professional privilege may enable him to refuse to answer questions – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • BQI18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 370

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a XD – 785 Temporary Protection visa – whether the Authority misapplied the relevant law – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • AJG19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 494

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for an extension of time to commence judicial review proceedings – Protection visa – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – short delay – satisfactory explanation – no merit in proposed grounds of review – application for an extension of time dismissed.

  • Wilkinson v Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd (No.2) [2020] FCCA 516

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – no appearance by the applicant at further second scheduled directions hearing –dismissal order and costs orders sought again by the respondent and putative respondents – applicant must be present to propound her case in this Court – application dismissed under Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) for absence of appearance of applicant – costs orders made under s.570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

  • Yancy & Yancy [2019] FCCA 3141

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – best interests of child – orders made.

  • DWX16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 486

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Immigration Assessment Authority – Safe Haven Enterprise Visa – No misunderstanding of complementary protection criterion – no claim of generalised violence squarely raised – no requirement to consider section 36(2B)(c).

  • Tanaumporn v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 467

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review dismissed – failure to comply with visa conditions – no compelling reasons to waive criteria in Schedule 3 to Migration Regulations 1994 – claims relating to sponsor wife’s financial difficulties – claims relating to psychological impact on applicant’s stepdaughter – no actual or apparent bias by Tribunal – no irrelevant considerations taken into account – no unreasonableness in Tribunal’s conclusion.

  • AAM18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 312

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for Temporary Protection Visa (subclass 785) – whether the Authority failed to consider certain integers of the applicant’s claims leading to a failure to exercise jurisdiction – whether the Authority misconstrued the real risk test and arrived at a conclusion that was not supported by evidence before the Authority – whether the Authority made a jurisdictional error – no jurisdictional error made out – the application is dismissed.

  • CDA19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 213

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Protection (Class XA) visa – whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant information – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • BJB17 & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 469

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Proper and genuine consideration of statelessness – conducting a review based on a false understanding – failure to exercise section 473DC power to get new information – no failure to comply with section 473CB(1)(b) requirement to give all material – no failure to have regard to substantial and relevant material.

  • ESQ18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 472

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Temporary Protection (Class XD) visa – decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – whether the IAA acted unreasonably in not exercising the discretion in s.473DC – whether the IAA erred in choosing not to consider a claim – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • FNU17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 501

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – Immigration Assessment Authority’s consideration of ‘exceptional circumstances’ pursuant to section 473DD of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – writs issued.

  • CBB16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 477

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – two grounds for review – application dismissed.

  • CLI19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 236

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority correctly applied s.473DD of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Authority failed to take into account relevant considerations – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • DOF16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 3539

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority misapplied the relevant law – whether the Authority’s decision was legally unreasonable – whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the Authority might not bring an independent and impartial mind to the determination of the matter on its merits – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Malla & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 470

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – show cause – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC, subclass 485) visa – application dismissed.

  • DDJ16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 3559

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority did not comply with the relevant law – whether the Authority’s decision was legally unreasonable – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Liao v Minister for Immigration [2019] FCCA 3727

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Application in a case requesting recusal – whether a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend that the Court might not bring an independent and impartial mind to the determination of the matter on its merits – no apprehended bias made out – application in a case dismissed.

  • Liao v Minister for Immigration (No.2) [2019] FCCA 3730

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Delegate of the First Respondent – application for a Business Skills (Provisional) (Class EB) (subclass 188) visa – whether there are concrete facts supporting a right of the applicant to come to the Court for declaratory relief – whether there is real question capable of engaging declaratory relief in proceedings before the Court – proceedings dismissed.

  • CCW19 & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 209

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Protection (Class XA) visa – whether the Tribunal failed to comply with sub-s 426(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether it was legally unreasonable for the Tribunal not to expressly consider exercising the discretion in s 427 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • EDA17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 249

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority erred in applying s.473DD of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Authority engaged with the applicant’s claims – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • BWR16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 481

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application dismissed – unrepresented applicant – no failure to consider claims separately or cumulatively – no ongoing profile as a supporter of the LTTE – lack of evidence to support claim.

  • BDG16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 482

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review – protection visa – jurisdictional error – litigation guardian appointed – pro bono Counsel appointed – claim of statelessness – no matters of principle – application dismissed.

  • Sinclair v All About Pumps & Pipes Pty Ltd & Anor [2020] FCCA 479

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Dismissal in contravention of general protection – whether applicant made a bona fide complaint under s.341(1)(c)(ii) – whether applicant took “sick leave” – applicant failed to establish that she made a complaint or took “sick leave” – “what if I’m wrong” test considered – respondent proved that adverse action not taken for a prohibited reason – application dismissed.

  • Muhlberg & Anor v Trustee for Sajasan Trust trading as Port Lincoln Travel & Cruise [2020] FCCA 427

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Adverse action – alteration of position to employees prejudice – dismissal of employees – whether either form of adverse action for impermissible reason – whether direction by employer to provide further evidence of inability to work due to personal illness was lawful.

    AWARDS – Breach of award – underpayment and non-payment – where alleged adverse action found not to have been for impermissible reason – underpayment rectified – matter adjourned for penalty submissions.

  • Hana Express Group Pty Ltd v Fair Work Ombudsman [2020] FCCA 54

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work – Review of a Compliance Notice – whether the Notice correctly identified breaches of the Road Transport and Distribution Award considered – non payment of delayed meal break penalties – meal breaks permitted but not required or encouraged – Notice confirmed.

  • Botha v George Weston Foods Limited trading as Tip Top Bakeries (Chullora) (No.2) [2020] FCCA 476

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether amended statement of claim is deficient – whether particular paragraphs of amended statement of claim are sufficiently particularised – amended statement of claim not deficient or insufficiently particularised.

  • Sefat & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor (No.2) [2020] FCCA 456

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Visa – Business Skills (Residence) visa – ‘ownership interest’ – ‘sole proprietor’ – whether Tribunal failed to properly interpret and apply statutory definition – whether jurisdictional error – error demonstrated – writs issued.

  • Dalla v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 454

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – visa cancellation pursuant to s.109 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – incorrect information included on an outgoing passenger card – whether notice under s.107 was valid – whether the outgoing passenger card was a “passenger card” for the purposes of s.102 – whether reg.3.01(4) (as it stood at the relevant time) applied to passenger cards – whether reg.3.01(4) was an exhaustive statement – held reg.3.01(4) applied to passenger cards and was not exhaustive statement of information able to be sought – application dismissed.

  • BXK17 & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 448

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision – refusal of protection visas – principal applicant claiming a fear of harm in China – applicant not believed – whether the Tribunal was biased – brought an inappropriately subjective mind to the case or erred in dealing with country information considered – whether the review process was fair considered - no jurisdictional error.

  • Open Eye Pty Ltd v Audio-Visual Copyright Society trading as Screenrights [2020] FCCA 7

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    COPYRIGHT – Application for summary dismissal – no reasonable prospect of success – application granted.

  • Thetiot v French Martini Pty Ltd [2020] FCCA 255

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – SMALL CLAIMS – Restaurant Industry Award 2010 – Whether the applicant was employed on a part-time or casual basis – underpayment of wages and penalty rates – application allowed.

  • Anstey v Mambourin Enterprises Ltd [2020] FCCA 461

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – Adverse action – suspension – allegations of misconduct – allegations of poor performance – refusal to convert a casual position to a permanent position – dismissal.

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – FAIR WORK – Alleged underpayments – failure to pay annual leave loading for two weeks annual leave given in addition to the Award requirement for four weeks annual leave – alleged failure to pay penalty rates for weekends – alleged failure to pay for time worked without meal breaks.

  • Guy v Commonwealth of Australia [2019] FCCA 3872

    Published date: 05 Mar 2020

    HUMAN RIGHTS – Unlawful discrimination application – legal capacity – whether the applicant understands the nature and possible consequences of the proceeding – whether the applicant is capable of adequately conducting or giving adequate instructions for the conduct of the proceedings.

  • Shrestha & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 234

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal – application for a Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa – whether the Tribunal complied with ss.359A, 359C and 359G of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction in relation to the second applicant – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • CQQ16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 3491

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority misconstrued s.473DC of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – no jurisdictional error made out – amended application dismissed.

  • CFQ18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 369

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of decision by Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s findings were open to it – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • CAF19 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 186

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – application for a Safe Haven Enterprise visa – whether the Authority failed to take into account relevant considerations – whether the Authority correctly applied the relevant law – no jurisdictional error made out – application dismissed.

  • Kalayzich v Santa Sabina College & Anor [2020] FCCA 11

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Fair Work – Interlocutory application by the respondents to strike out the applicant’s statement of claim – consideration of the principles relating to striking out pleadings – Federal Circuit Court not generally a court of pleadings – statement of claim as amended imperfect but capable of corrective amendment – consideration of options available in pleading a defence or seeking further particulars of the statement of claim.

  • EAU17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 91

    Published date: 03 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Sri Lanka – applicant believed for the most part but his fears found to be not well-founded – whether the Authority misunderstood the applicant’s claims, failed to identify elements of the process before the delegate, made an unreasonable finding, applied the wrong test or misunderstood country information considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union & Ors (No.7) [2020] FCCA 351

    Published date: 03 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Assessment of pecuniary penalties for admitted contraventions of s.343(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – orders for the payment of pecuniary penalties made.

  • Springs v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 371

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Act) in relation to a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming a decision not to grant a Distinguished Talent (Residence) (Class BX) Subclass 858 visa – whether the Tribunal failed to comply with s.359A and s.359AA of the Act in relation to two items of information – whether the Tribunal acted irrationally in concluding it was not satisfied on the material before it that the applicant has an internationally recognised record of exceptional and outstanding achievement in the arts – whether the Tribunal considered the application on the basis of criteria that did not form part of the criteria by reference to which it was required to determine the application for review before it – no jurisdictional error.

  • Singh v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 3659

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – jurisdictional error – application for student visa – applicant failed to appear at hearing before the court – evidence indicates applicant aware of hearing – applicant has forwarded written request to transfer proceeding to Melbourne day prior to hearing – applicant assets he is unwell – application for review does not contain clear assertion of jurisdictional error – application for transfer and adjournment not supported by satisfactory evidence – no obvious merit in application – application for transfer dismissed – application dismissed.

  • ELQ17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 162

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – review by Immigration Assessment Authority – where Authority considered a range of further information that was before it on review – whether various items of information were new information – where Authority rejected submissions by applicant on basis not satisfied exceptional circumstances were shown – whether Authority misconstrued nature of power to receive new information – where dispute as to precise nature of error grounding jurisdictional error – applicable principles – no error demonstrated.

    MIGRATION – Apprehended bias – where applicant contends decision of Authority that exceptional circumstances not shown to receive submissions stood in direct contrast to decision that such circumstances were demonstrated in relation to receipt of 2017 DFAT report – whether open to consider reasons of decision-maker in determination of apprehended bias based challenge – applicable principles – no error demonstrated.

    MIGRATION – Country information – whether Authority failed to consider country information – whether failure to consider contradictory information –weight attached to information – whether applicant’s profile was such as to expose him to a real risk of harm – application dismissed.

  • DLS18 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 29

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Review of Immigration Assessment Authority decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming a fear of harm in Afghanistan – applicant disbelieved in critical respects and other fears found not to be well-founded – whether the Authority considered all of the applicant’s claims or failed to give the applicant the opportunity to comment considered – whether the Authority erred in dealing with two non-disclosure certificates considered – no jurisdictional error.

  • CJC16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 325

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – where Tribunal finds that applicant was someone who had not been of interest to the authorities over the period 2007-2016 for any reason – where finding was a finding made by the Tribunal along the way to its conclusion that the applicant did not face a ‘real chance’ of being detained or persecuted once he had been released into the community – where finding was irrational – whether finding tainted by extreme irrationality – where, properly understood, reasoning demonstrated that the Tribunal found, as the applicant did not have a relevant profile with Sri Lankan authorities, he would be of no real interest once released into the community – no error demonstrated.

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – whether Tribunal applied UNHRC guidelines and displaced the criterion to be applied under s 36(2)(a) of the Act in the consideration whether it was satisfied that the applicant met criteria for protection visa – no error demonstrated.

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – whether applicant was denied procedural fairness in the manner in which the Tribunal employed transcript of a second hearing when making findings following a third hearing, upon the issues arising in relation the decision under review – application dismissed.

  • CHP16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 367

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – judicial review – whether jurisdictional error in evaluation whether applicant satisfied the refugee criterion under s 36(2)(a) of the Act by substituting a requirement that he demonstrate he was a specific target for the Taliban above other Turi Shias from the Kurram Agency – evaluation of well-founded fear of persecution – ‘real chance’ test – whether Tribunal failed to apply properly an assessment whether applicant faced a risk of harm in the foreseeable future – assessment of well-founded fear of harm is not relative – objective assessment required – predictive assessment required to be sufficiently forward looking – whether assessment mere speculation – whether conjecture or surmise – application dismissed.

  • BZA17 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2020] FCCA 375

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    MIGRATION – Application for remedies under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in relation to decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority (Authority) affirming decision not to grant safe haven enterprise visa – whether the Authority considered a particular claim or item of evidence – whether the Authority made any jurisdictional error in the manner in which it purported to undertake a cumulative assessment of risk of harm – no jurisdictional error.

  • Rangi v Action Workforce Pty Ltd & Ors (No.2) [2020] FCCA 428

    Published date: 02 Mar 2020

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – COSTS – Fair Work proceedings – consideration of s.570(2)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009 – whether the Applicant instituted proceedings without reasonable cause – determined that six of seven issues for determination by the Court were instituted without reasonable cause – Applicant seeks declaration against an entity not a party to the matter – declaration not made – costs ordered against the Applicant – costs calculated on scale.

  • Lagana & Lagana [2019] FCCA 3862

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – spousal maintenance Application – issues of ongoing lack of disclosure by the Husband – contested aspects involving child support but in circumstances where there is no formal Application before the Court.

  • Gong & Yee (No.2) [2020] FCCA 670

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Costs – respondent seeks costs after applicant wholly unsuccessful in application for leave to proceed out of time.

  • Gong & Yee [2020] FCCA 400

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Application to proceed out of time – flaws in application – 5 years out of time – short relationship.

  • Beales & Zang [2020] FCCA 692

    Published date: 31 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Property – Spousal Maintenance and Child Support proceedings – married less than five years – cohabitation approximately 12 months in total – young child – both have reasonable parenting skills – mother with limited English and employment skills – father initially more available – ultimately equally shared care – no significant contribution by Mother save for s.79(4)(c) – a substantial not token contribution.

  • Gainsford & Gainsford [2020] FCCA 394

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – long relationship and marriage – where wife made a large contribution early in relationship – where husband received a proportion of matrimonial property pool post separation after sale of property – where wife in receipt of Super Fund 1 pension – where both parties in poor health – Held husband receive 45% and wife receive 55% of matrimonial property pool and where Super Fund 1 pension be split 45% to husband and 55% to wife.

  • Fullmer & Omeros (No.2) [2020] FCCA 466

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where final parenting orders were made in March 2019 – consideration of the rule in Rice & Asplund – application dismissed.

  • Delmere & Dayton [2020] FCCA 379

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Updated family report where clear parenting recommendation made – matter clearly amenable to mediation – desirability of matters being settled where possible – matter ordered to be mediated – trial dates vacated.

  • Deave & Pallin [2020] FCCA 415

    Published date: 30 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – initial contributions – husband’s post-separation contributions – extent of husband’s expenditure post-separation.

  • Dealey & Vaille [2020] FCCA 287

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Parents living in Melbourne and Sydney respectively – child conceived during ‘long distance’ relationship – relationship rapidly breaking down after birth of the child – neither parent having significant financial resources – disputes about how much time the child spends with the father – disputes about travel and who should pay for it – orders made in child’s best interests bearing in mind practical difficulties of expense and distance.

  • Daultrey & Tavener [2020] FCCA 399

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – application for interim orders for the sale of several jointly-owned properties – where Applicant does not want to retain the properties in question – where Respondent wants to retain the properties but has no income or capacity to retain in her sole name – where Applicant has already expended significant sum on joint and other assets – where the Respondent’s lack of supporting documentation means Applicant’s version of events and evidence is preferred – Orders made for sale of properties.

  • Mertens & Mertens [2020] FCCA 207

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Child aged 10 – where after a trial in 2014 the father was found to pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the child for reasons including but not limited to his conviction for sexually assaulting a child in New Zealand – where the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer asked the trial judge to make an order for the child to spend supervised time with the father and such an order was made – where the arrangements for the child to spend supervised time with the father broke down in 2016 and where the child has spent only two hours with the father in the last 3 ½ years – where the mother seeks the discharge of the order for supervised time, the discharge of some of the other orders made in 2014 and an order that the child spend no time and have no communication with the father – where the father opposes this and seeks at the very least re-instatement of supervised time – where the father put forward no practical proposal for how supervised time could occur – where the father is litigious, pedantic and combative and where the mother is fearful of him and worn out trying to cope with his behaviour – where there is no benefit to the child in the court making an order for time in any form and where such an order would place an unacceptable burden on the mother – order made for the father to spend no time and have no communication with the child and for some of the other orders made in 2014 to be discharged.

  • Eady & Radcliff [2020] FCCA 436

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Section 79A application – inherent/implied jurisdiction of the Court – exercise of jurisdiction.

  • Drury & Benson [2020] FCCA 250

    Published date: 27 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – where the parties were in a de facto relationship for approximately 10 years – whether various addbacks should be included in the property pool – whether an alleged loan from the Applicant’s parents should be brought to account – whether the Applicant should receive a Kennon adjustment – orders made for the pool to be divided 60/40 in favour of the Applicant.

  • Dennis & Weiss [2020] FCCA 280

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – final orders – one child, aged 8 years – whether equal shared parental responsibility is appropriate – what time the child should spend with the father –– where the mother is the primary carer – where the mother has relocated to Town A and the father remains in Town B – where there is a high level of parental conflict, an inability to communicate and at times lack of child focus – where there are no real risks pursuant to s60CC(2)(b) – best interests of the child.

  • Camden v Child Support Registrar [2020] FCCA 385

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal in respect of administrative decision to make Departure Prohibition Order – applicant bears onus to establish that DPO should not have been made – Registrar required to be reasonably satisfied of various matters – existence of child support liability – lack of satisfactory arrangements to discharge liability – persistent and unreasonable failure to pay –whether desirable to make DPO – has applicant discharged onus on basis issue of DPO was legally unreasonable or abuse of process – capacity of applicant to pay – appeal dismissed – costs follow event.

  • Badeni & Dangerfield [2020] FCCA 344

    Published date: 26 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Where final parenting orders have been made – where parties have consented to reopen proceedings – where father seeks specific orders for one of five children the subject of the proceedings, which child has diabetes, to be fitted with a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device – where father seeks sole parental responsibility of that one child to be able to authorise the fitting of that device – where the father alleges that the matter falls within the Court’s welfare or parens patriae jurisdiction or that the Court’s approval is required as a special medical procedure – where the device is not therapeutic and, hence, Re Marion is not relevant as a “treatment” decision and certainly not an irreversible treatment decision is not required – where the factual matrix of the matter reveals nothing more than a parenting dispute – where the mother seeks to re-open orders for the father’s time with the diabetic child based on concerns as to the father’s address of the child’s health needs – whether there is an unacceptable risk to the child if the monitoring device is not fitted – whether there is an unacceptable risk to the child if the child spends overnight time with the father – no unacceptable risk established – where parties have extremely poor and ineffective communication – where the father has sought to engage numerous third parties in issues between the parties – whether further counselling is warranted – where the only means of reducing conflict and the child’s exposure to conflict is to allocate sole parental responsibility – where without allocation of parental responsibility for the issue to one parent there will likely be ongoing conflict and disputation and. Possibly, further litigation (nothing that the medical issue has been the cause of this tranche of litigation) – where both parents have demonstrated a lack of insight in some respects – whether children’s best interests supports or precludes both parents being involved in the children’s education – where no significant change in circumstances is apparent since the matter was last concluded – where the orders entered into between the parties by consent are unnecessarily complex and require redrafting – where redrafting and reaffirming the majority of the orders previously made, and addressing parental responsibility for one child’s medical care, is all that is required to meet the children’s best interests.

  • Iannello & Iannello (No.5) [2020] FCCA 589

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – parental responsibility – whether the mother should have sole parental responsibility – competing applications for who the children should live with – child’s spend time arrangements between the parents – best interests of the child – finding of psychological harm and emotional abuse – where the husband has mental impairment impacting his ability to care for the children.

    FAMILY LAW – Property – just and equitable to alter the parties’ property interests – parties unable to provide an agreed asset and liability statement – where parties have had several withdrawals since separation – where much of the asset pool has been depleted – where the husband received a total and permanent disability payment as a result of a workplace injury – where the husband withdrew from his superannuation early – notional addback of property to the asset pool.

  • Yim & Zieth (No.4) [2020] FCCA 245

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Costs – where applicant seeks costs having regard to respondent’s conduct in several aspects of case – general principle that each party to bear own costs – where general principle yields to power to award costs – relevant considerations – power to set the amount of such costs – power to set quantum, determine method for computation or to refer to taxation – quantum set.

  • Delancy & Theobald [2019] FCCA 3852

    Published date: 25 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Practice and procedure – application of s102NA Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – rationale of this provision.

  • Wagner & Oakley [2020] FCCA 316

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – risk assessment – family violence – physical and mental capacity of father to care for children.

  • Barham & Barham [2020] FCCA 109

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property Settlement – contributions – inheritance to one party late in marriage – s.75(2) factors.

  • Freiberg & Freiberg [2020] FCCA 198

    Published date: 24 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – whether a now 13 year old child, whose mother alleges long term and ongoing family violence perpetrated by the father, ought to be forced to spend time with his mother in circumstances where she is alleged to have serious substance abuse and mental health issues.

  • Padmore & Maclean [2020] FCCA 260

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – application for sole responsibility – school holidays – whether order should be made permitting the mother to take the child on school holidays during the school term with the permission of the school.

  • Bayle & Dallaway [2020] FCCA 460

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Issue in dispute the father’s time with children aged 5 and 3 – where the father filed a trial affidavit but failed to attend the hearing – where the lawyers assigned to the father sought leave to withdraw – matter heard and determined on an undefended basis – where the father has an extensive criminal record and subjected the mother to severe family violence during their relationship – where during one mention of the matter the father lost his temper and kicked and shoved the court door while storming in and out of the courtroom – where the father has stalked, threatened and intimidated the mother since the proceedings commenced and has been charged with further family violence offences – where the children would be unsafe in the father’s unsupervised care and where supervised time would be entirely inappropriate – order made for no time and no communication – where this outcome is unfortunate because the father is Aboriginal and the mother is not but where the children’s safety must be prioritised.

  • Asgar & Kassab [2020] FCCA 391

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – assessment of contributions – justice and equity.

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – no opposition to orders sought.

  • Austwick & Leandros [2019] FCCA 3846

    Published date: 23 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Dispute as to jurisdiction based on contested date of separation – where matter listed for hearing to determine whether a section 90RD Declaration can be granted which establishes jurisdiction – Where separation found to have occurred more than two years prior to the date of filing of the Initiating Application – Where s.44(6) considered as to whether leave to apply out of time should be granted – Where the total nett value of assets found to be approximately $1,000 – where there is no utility in leave to apply being granted in those circumstances – where applicant appears by telephone from overseas – where adjournment sought and refused – where injunctive relief was obtained at the first Court event – injunctions discharged – costs sought and considered – costs ordered.

  • Seeger & Seeger [2020] FCCA 137

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property settlement – consideration of ownership of property in Country A and jewellery owned by the parties – contributions – how the court should deal with the husband’s alleged failure to provide full and frank disclosure about his income and financial position.

  • Choi & Dang & Ors [2020] FCCA 53

    Published date: 20 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – extraordinarily complex property case – all main witnesses giving evidence through interpreters – none of these witnesses convincing – documents created which did not mean what they say – pool all but impossible to establish – intervention of third parties with interests in the pool – no detailed submissions as to the Court’s powers to effect orders altering third party interests – Court doing its best in the circumstances – division of the pool 80/20 in favour of the Husband – parties to be further heard as to the form of declarations and orders to be made.

  • Labros & Nader [2020] FCCA 132

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – De Facto Property – relationship of around thirty years in duration – relationship produced one child now 26 years of age – applicant engaged in home duties and parenting during majority of relationship – child concerned has special needs – respondent engaged in paid workforce – pool of assets represented by two pieces of real estate of readily ascertainable worth – parties’ superannuation readily ascertainable – assets and superannuation of relatively modest value – during relationship respondent conducting clandestine relationship with another person overseas – respondent supported this person and two children by means of regular payments from parties’ joint assets – sum advanced overseas in an amount in excess of $200,000.00 – applicant seeks to add back sum dollar for dollar – how should sum be approached – assessment of contributions – applicant exemplary parent and homemaker – respondent primary breadwinner – assessment of prospective needs – just and equitable.

    COSTS – Applicant seeks indemnity costs on basis of respondent’s conduct – respondent has admitted money forwarded overseas – stage when admission made – matters to be considered – whether just to make order for costs.

  • Keith & Keith [2020] FCCA 28

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Mother seeking to relocate to Queensland and father opposing – short and unhappy marriage – father returning to Country A for three and a half years and not seeing child – whether father has appropriately taken advantage of court ordered opportunities to spend time with the child – whether father should spend unsupervised time with the child – Court finding mother’s application to relocate reasonable – interim orders made to enable father to prove commitment to spending time with the child.

  • Kedves & Segal [2020] FCCA 67

    Published date: 19 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – parental responsibility – how a child’s time with her father should progress in circumstances where the parents are in high conflict and cannot communicate.

  • Wagstaff & Wagstaff (No.2) [2020] FCCA 308

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – the rule in Rice & Asplund – application allowed.

  • Scala & Scala (No.2) [2020] FCCA 38

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Costs – application for costs by successful applicant – whether costs should follow the event in respect of accrued jurisdiction claim for damages for breach of confidence – whether costs should be paid on an indemnity basis.

  • Sander & Abbey (No.3) [2020] FCCA 133

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Contravention of parenting order – high conflict family – final orders made in August 2018 – further proceedings instituted in October 2018 – principles applicable to alteration of order – parenting orders amended – matters to be considered.

  • Ryan & Ramakers [2020] FCCA 314

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Undefended hearing – order for no time with father.

  • Gaize & Gaize (No.2) [2020] FCCA 297

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – urgent interim relocation application – short form reasons given in accordance with section 69ZL of the Family Law Act 1975 – where the mother is the primary carer of the two children (aged 7 and 4) – where the mother is the primary attachment figure for the children – where the mother seeks to relocate the residence of the children to Sydney for a period of 10 ½ months from 7 February 2020 until 24 December 2020 to enable her to complete her training as a health care worker – where the mother proposes that the children will spend time with the father every second weekend (in Brisbane, at her expense) during the course of 2020 – where the father sought that the children live with him should the mother relocate to Sydney – where the mother stated that she will not temporarily relocate to Sydney unless the children relocate with her – freedom of movement – expert evidence – where the Court is not bound to accept expert opinion – where the mother’s proposal at the time of the interim hearing was significantly different to the mother’s proposal at the time of the preparation of the family report (in particular in relation to the amount of time the children will spend with the father) – where judgment was delivered ex tempore by the Court at the conclusion of the hearing – where the father initially opposed the telephone attendance of the family report writer on the day of the interim hearing (31 January 2020) but subsequently sought (when judgment was being delivered) to adjourn the proceedings and reopen the evidence in order to obtain an updated family report or memorandum.

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – APPLICATION TO ADJOURN AND RE-OPEN – Where the application for an adjournment was made while the Court was in the very process of delivering oral Reasons for Judgment ex tempore – where the application for an adjournment was refused – where the Court incorporates in these Reasons for Judgment the reasons provided in Gaize & Gaize [2020] FCCA 296 and on the transcript of the proceedings on 31 January 2020 – where the application for temporary relocation was heard urgently in circumstances where the mother needs to start her employment training in Sydney in February 2020 – where any adjournment or delay would effectively defeat the mother’s application.

  • Gaize & Gaize [2020] FCCA 296

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – urgent interim relocation application – short form reasons given in accordance with section 69ZL of the Family Law Act 1975 – where the mother is the primary carer of the two children (aged 7 and 4) – where the mother is the primary attachment figure for the children – where the mother seeks to relocate the residence of the children to Sydney for a period of 10 ½ months from 7 February 2020 until 24 December 2020 to enable her to complete her training as a professional – where the mother proposes that the children will spend time with the father every second weekend (in Brisbane, at her expense) during the course of 2020 – where the father sought that the children live with him should the mother relocate to Sydney – where the mother stated that she will not temporarily relocate to Sydney unless the children relocate with her – freedom of movement – expert evidence – where the Court is not bound to accept expert opinion – where the mother’s proposal at the time of the interim hearing was significantly different to the mother’s proposal at the time of the preparation of the family report (in particular in relation to the amount of time the children will spend with the father) – where judgment was delivered ex tempore by the Court at the conclusion of the hearing – where the father initially opposed the telephone attendance of the family report writer on the day of the interim hearing (31 January 2020) but subsequently sought (when judgment was being delivered) to adjourn the proceedings and reopen the evidence in order to obtain an updated family report or memorandum – where the application for an adjournment was made while the Court was in the very process of delivering oral Reasons for Judgment ex tempore – where the application for an adjournment was refused.

  • Gabert & Gabert [2020] FCCA 27

    Published date: 18 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – disputed primary residence and spend time regimes for 10 and 6 year old children – elder child autistic but mother exaggerating and father not accepting the condition – father abandoning residence claim during hearing – orders made as proposed by the family report and Independent Children’s Lawyer.

    FAMILY LAW – Property – wife seeking lion’s share of property pool, equalisation of superannuation and ongoing spousal maintenance – husband not able to pay spousal maintenance – Court deciding 70/30 division just and equitable.

  • Layton & Layton [2019] FCCA 3837

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property – failure of husband to participate in proceedings – procedural fairness – where the wife’s evidence is unchallenged – assessment of contributions – wife’s contribution to the husband’s business – where the wife is the primary caregiver – significant family violence – assessment of future needs – where the husband is 19 years older than the wife – capacity of husband to work – health of wife – wife is full time carer of children – premature distribution of funds by the husband – property adjustment of sixty-forty per cent ordered in favour of the wife.

  • Bacote & Bacote [2020] FCCA 262

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Father seeks week-about arrangement – Mother seeks that the children live with her and spend substantial and significant time with the father – Independent Children’s Lawyer supports the Mother’s proposal – Family Consultant recommends a build up to a week-about arrangement over time – orders made in accordance with the Mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer’s proposal.

  • Pinfold & Crammond [2020] FCCA 324

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Transfer to the Magellan list in the Family Court of Australia.

  • Raburn & Gabelman [2020] FCCA 258

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – interim hearing – relocation – 21 month old child – where the mother seeks to relocate to Canberra with the child – where the mother is presently on a bridging visa – where the mother has obtained sponsored employment in Canberra to fulfil visa requirements – equal shared parental responsibility agreed between the parties – where the father seeks for the child to remain in Sydney and spend time with him on each alternative weekend – whether the child’s overnight time with the father should increase.

  • Mertz & Wadding [2020] FCCA Mertz & Wadding [2020] FCCA 203

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Ex tempore ruling.

  • Iannello & Iannello (No.4) [2019] FCCA 3842

    Published date: 17 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim judgment – refusal to transfer to Family Court of Australia – dismissal of Application in a Case to stay proceedings pending the determination of appeal – refusal of oral application for the bifurcation of the proceeding – where the Respondent Husband is awaiting the determination of Serious Injury Application – Respondent Husband’s Serious Injury Application lodged 18 November 2019 – Respondent Husband’s injuries sustained in October 2012.

  • Maeda & Beaulieu (No.3) [2020] FCCA 217

    Published date: 12 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – interim hearing - best interests of the child – where mother withheld the child – where allegations of assault of child by mother – child’s time with father increased.

  • Abeln & Abeln [2020] FCCA 193

    Published date: 12 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – best interests of the child – recovery order – where father withheld the children – where the allegations made by the father found to be unsubstantiated – where no unacceptable risk is determined.

  • Simen & Simen [2019] FCCA 3533

    Published date: 11 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – best interests of child – orders made.

  • Fosse & Fosse [2019] FCCA 3140

    Published date: 10 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Undefended hearing – property proceedings – orders made.

  • Romilly & Klima [2019] FCCA 3789

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – best interests of children – orders made

  • Maassen & Maassen [2018] FCCA 3683

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and related legislation – application to discharge order for arbitration – Power to discharge order for arbitration.

  • Palagi & Madill [2019] FCCA 1626

    Published date: 06 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – where concerns exist about parenting capacity of both the Mother and the Father – risk assessment and management exercise – use of chronologies and summaries of evidence.

  • Sackman & Sackman [2020] FCCA 452

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Property settlement – 32 year marriage which produced 2 children – consideration of contributions and future factors – just and equitable outcome.

  • Bager & Bager [2020] FCCA 114

    Published date: 04 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim hearing – parenting – relocation – whether the children should live with the mother and spend time with the father – whether the children should live with the father and spend time with the mother – whether the parents should have equal shared parental responsibility – whether the children should spend equal time or substantial and significant time with each parent.

  • Woods & Hendry [2019] FCCA 3838

    Published date: 03 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – best interests of children – orders made.

  • Findlay & Reis [2020] FCCA 425

    Published date: 03 Mar 2020

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – application for change to parenting arrangements six years after final parenting orders made – ongoing hostility between the parties – unlikelihood of substantial change to arrangements – negative aspects of litigation outweigh potential benefits to the children – application dismissed in accordance with principles in Rice & Asplund.

  • Lu v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2043

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error for not giving the applicant additional time to submit documentary evidence – whether a claim of incorrect translation services provided to the applicant at the Tribunal hearing affected the Tribunal’s decision – whether the Tribunal considered all of the applicant’s claims – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • Lu v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2043

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error for not giving the applicant additional time to submit documentary evidence – whether a claim of incorrect translation services provided to the applicant at the Tribunal hearing affected the Tribunal’s decision – whether the Tribunal considered all of the applicant’s claims – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • SZTJB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2158

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (now the Administrative Appeals Tribunal) – whether the Tribunal failed to consider a particular social group or to consider extortion claim or applied the incorrect test, asked itself incorrect questions or failed to ask the correct questions – no jurisdictional error.
  • SZTJB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2158

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (now the Administrative Appeals Tribunal) – whether the Tribunal failed to consider a particular social group or to consider extortion claim or applied the incorrect test, asked itself incorrect questions or failed to ask the correct questions – no jurisdictional error.

  • BVL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2157

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal erred in failing to consider the Refugee criterion where the Delegate had already considered same – whether the Tribunal failed to address the applicant’s religious claims – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • BVL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2157

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal erred in failing to consider the Refugee criterion where the Delegate had already considered same – whether the Tribunal failed to address the applicant’s religious claims – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • Singh v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2131

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether Tribunal incorrectly assumed that the definition of “ competent English” in reg.1.15C of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) ( Regulations) was an exhaustive definition.

    DELEGATED LEGISLATION – Whether instrument made under reg.1.15C of the Regulations nominating a non-existent language test and score rendered invalid the regulation – regulation not invalid.
  • Singh v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2131

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether Tribunal incorrectly assumed that the definition of “ competent English” in reg.1.15C of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) ( Regulations) was an exhaustive definition.

    DELEGATED LEGISLATION – Whether instrument made under reg.1.15C of the Regulations nominating a non-existent language test and score rendered invalid the regulation – regulation not invalid.

  • SZWAZ v Minister for Immigration & Anor (No.2) [2016] FCCA 2214

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether, given certain findings the Tribunal made favourable to the applicant, it was reasonably open to the Tribunal not to be satisfied the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution or that there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence the applicant will suffer significant harm if returned to his country of nationality – no jurisdictional error.
  • SZWAZ v Minister for Immigration & Anor (No.2) [2016] FCCA 2214

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether, given certain findings the Tribunal made favourable to the applicant, it was reasonably open to the Tribunal not to be satisfied the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution or that there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence the applicant will suffer significant harm if returned to his country of nationality – no jurisdictional error.

  • AEB15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2166

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal erred in dealing with the claim of extortion – whether the Tribunal erred in holding that it was reasonable for the applicant to relocate to Kathmandu – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • AEB15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2166

    26 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal erred in dealing with the claim of extortion – whether the Tribunal erred in holding that it was reasonable for the applicant to relocate to Kathmandu – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • SZUQB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2180

    25 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection (Class XA) visa – Bangladeshi BNP supporter – Tribunal highly critical of applicant’s credibility – Tribunal affirmed decision to refuse visa application.

    REASONS – Adequacy of reasons – sufficiency of phrase “for the reasons above” when used in connection with s.36(2)(a) and also with s.36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) notwithstanding different issues for consideration – no error in using that phrase in both contexts in the facts of this case.

    CLAIMS – Review of authorities.

    LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – Pro bono counsel – finest tradition of the Bar displayed by counsel appearing pro bono in migration cases.
  • SZUQB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2180

    25 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection (Class XA) visa – Bangladeshi BNP supporter – Tribunal highly critical of applicant’s credibility – Tribunal affirmed decision to refuse visa application.

    REASONS – Adequacy of reasons – sufficiency of phrase “for the reasons above” when used in connection with s.36(2)(a) and also with s.36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) notwithstanding different issues for consideration – no error in using that phrase in both contexts in the facts of this case.

    CLAIMS – Review of authorities.

    LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – Pro bono counsel – finest tradition of the Bar displayed by counsel appearing pro bono in migration cases.

  • SZVYB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2179

    25 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection (Class XA) visa – allegations of desecration to a Christian cross in Lebanon – assertions that the applicant would be killed if he remained in Lebanon – credibility issues – Tribunal did not believe applicant’s version of events – applicant an unreliable witness.

    SHOW CAUSE PROCEDURE – Power not to be exercised lightly – AMF15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 68 applied – proceeding summarily dismissed.
  • SZVYB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2179

    25 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection (Class XA) visa – allegations of desecration to a Christian cross in Lebanon – assertions that the applicant would be killed if he remained in Lebanon – credibility issues – Tribunal did not believe applicant’s version of events – applicant an unreliable witness.

    SHOW CAUSE PROCEDURE – Power not to be exercised lightly – AMF15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 68 applied – proceeding summarily dismissed.

  • Dyankov & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2167

    24 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial Review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal – application for a Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Migration Review Tribunal held no jurisdiction to review decision – application dismissed.
  • Dyankov & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2167

    24 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial Review of a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal – application for a Business Entry (Class UC) visa – Migration Review Tribunal held no jurisdiction to review decision – application dismissed.

  • Joshi v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2168

    24 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for extension of time for review of former Migration Review Tribunal decision – whether application to the Court is competent under s.486D – whether application to the Court is an abuse of process where applicant previously discontinued judicial review proceedings regarding the same Tribunal decision – application to extend time refused.
  • Joshi v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2168

    24 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for extension of time for review of former Migration Review Tribunal decision – whether application to the Court is competent under s.486D – whether application to the Court is an abuse of process where applicant previously discontinued judicial review proceedings regarding the same Tribunal decision – application to extend time refused.

  • Ballantyne v Hartnett Legal Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2016] FCCA 2165

    23 August 2016

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to abridge time for service of subpoenas.
  • Ballantyne v Hartnett Legal Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2016] FCCA 2165

    23 August 2016

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to abridge time for service of subpoenas.

  • AEN16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2039

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – “Information” for the purpose of ss.424AA and 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether information put on social media can constitute “information” – breach of s.424A because no particulars given – invalidity of Tribunal decision.
  • AEN16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2039

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – “Information” for the purpose of ss.424AA and 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether information put on social media can constitute “information” – breach of s.424A because no particulars given – invalidity of Tribunal decision.

  • AAW16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1643

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – fear of harm if returned to Egypt because known there as a homosexual – finality of litigation – applicant’s intention to run a different factual case before Tribunal – no jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed.
  • AAW16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1643

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa – fear of harm if returned to Egypt because known there as a homosexual – finality of litigation – applicant’s intention to run a different factual case before Tribunal – no jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed.

  • TM 25 Holding BV & Ors v Ghamloush [2016] FCCA 2106

    23 August 2016

  • TM 25 Holding BV & Ors v Ghamloush [2016] FCCA 2106

    23 August 2016

  • Wang & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2149

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Business skills visa – direct and continuous involvement in the management of a business – allegation of bias of Tribunal – Wednesbury unreasonableness – no procedural unfairness or jurisdictional error – application for review dismissed.
  • Wang & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2149

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Business skills visa – direct and continuous involvement in the management of a business – allegation of bias of Tribunal – Wednesbury unreasonableness – no procedural unfairness or jurisdictional error – application for review dismissed.

  • SZVAD v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2094

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – adverse credibility findings by Tribunal – no jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed.
  • SZVAD v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2094

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Protection visa application – adverse credibility findings by Tribunal – no jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed.

  • SZVZB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1525

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Review of former Refugee Review Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming persecution as a teacher at a girls’ school in Pakistan – applicant believed in part by the delegate but disbelieved by the Tribunal – Tribunal breached s.425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by failing to explain to the applicant that his claim to have been a teacher at a girls’ school in Pakistan, which had been accepted by the delegate, would be an issue in the review.
  • SZVZB v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1525

    23 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Review of former Refugee Review Tribunal decision – refusal of a protection visa – applicant claiming persecution as a teacher at a girls’ school in Pakistan – applicant believed in part by the delegate but disbelieved by the Tribunal – Tribunal breached s.425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by failing to explain to the applicant that his claim to have been a teacher at a girls’ school in Pakistan, which had been accepted by the delegate, would be an issue in the review.

  • AIZ15 & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2122

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for a protection (Class XA) visa – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal complied with s.424A – whether the Tribunal erred by failing to have documents translated into English – whether the Tribunal constructively failed to exercise its jurisdiction –no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

    PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – New ground raised in submissions without leave after hearing
  • AIZ15 & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2122

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for a protection (Class XA) visa – review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal complied with s.424A – whether the Tribunal erred by failing to have documents translated into English – whether the Tribunal constructively failed to exercise its jurisdiction –no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

    PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – New ground raised in submissions without leave after hearing

  • Fair Work Ombudsman v Mamak Pty Ltd & Ors [2016] FCCA 2104

    19 August 2016

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Penalty – contraventions of the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 relating to remuneration – failure to comply with record keeping obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – appropriate penalty to be imposed – relevant considerations – applicable penalty of each contravention.
  • Fair Work Ombudsman v Mamak Pty Ltd & Ors [2016] FCCA 2104

    19 August 2016

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Penalty – contraventions of the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 relating to remuneration – failure to comply with record keeping obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – appropriate penalty to be imposed – relevant considerations – applicable penalty of each contravention.

  • Oz v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1810

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to properly consider evidence before it – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the law.
  • Oz v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1810

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for Other Family (Residence) (Class BU) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to properly consider evidence before it – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the law.

  • BDI15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2116

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for protection visa – review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to consider the consequence of the applicant’s inter-caste marriage within the meaning of s.91R(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal ought to have considered the time period in which the applicant had resided outside of Nepal gave rise to the risk of serious harm within s.91R(1)(b) – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • BDI15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2116

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for protection visa – review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to consider the consequence of the applicant’s inter-caste marriage within the meaning of s.91R(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal ought to have considered the time period in which the applicant had resided outside of Nepal gave rise to the risk of serious harm within s.91R(1)(b) – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • SZVFW & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2083

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (now the Administrative Appeals Tribunal) – whether the Tribunal’s exercise of its power to make a decision on the review in circumstances where Applicants did not attend the Tribunal hearing was legally unreasonable.
  • SZVFW & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2083

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (now the Administrative Appeals Tribunal) – whether the Tribunal’s exercise of its power to make a decision on the review in circumstances where Applicants did not attend the Tribunal hearing was legally unreasonable.

  • Phornpisutikul v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1934

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness by failing to review the delegate’s decision because it was not an MRT-reviewable decision – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • Phornpisutikul v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1934

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal denied the applicant procedural fairness by failing to review the delegate’s decision because it was not an MRT-reviewable decision – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • SZTTO v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2128

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal – standard of interpretation at Tribunal hearing – whether non-compliance with s.425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
  • SZTTO v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2128

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application to review decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal – standard of interpretation at Tribunal hearing – whether non-compliance with s.425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

  • AOI16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2012

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal –application for protection visa – grounds of apostasy and political opinion – whether Tribunal failed to consider the previous findings and/or recommendations of the Independent Protection Assessor – whether the Tribunal’s adverse credibility findings were open to it – whether the Tribunal’s findings were unreasonable or irrational – apprehended bias – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.
  • AOI16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2012

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Review of decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal –application for protection visa – grounds of apostasy and political opinion – whether Tribunal failed to consider the previous findings and/or recommendations of the Independent Protection Assessor – whether the Tribunal’s adverse credibility findings were open to it – whether the Tribunal’s findings were unreasonable or irrational – apprehended bias – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed.

  • SZTIM v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2124

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether it was relevant to the review for the Tribunal to ask the applicant questions of the applicant’s knowledge of the grounds on which another person claimed protection – whether the Tribunal asked such questions for the purpose of considering such other person’s application for review – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably in making an adverse credibility finding partly on the basis of the manner in which the applicant answered questions about the other person’s application for review – whether the Tribunal breached s.429 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by asking questions of the applicant about the grounds on which another person applied for protection – no jurisdictional error.
  • SZTIM v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2124

    19 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) – whether it was relevant to the review for the Tribunal to ask the applicant questions of the applicant’s knowledge of the grounds on which another person claimed protection – whether the Tribunal asked such questions for the purpose of considering such other person’s application for review – whether the Tribunal acted unreasonably in making an adverse credibility finding partly on the basis of the manner in which the applicant answered questions about the other person’s application for review – whether the Tribunal breached s.429 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) by asking questions of the applicant about the grounds on which another person applied for protection – no jurisdictional error.

  • Eden & Kingston [2016] FCCA 2144

    19 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Children – interim parenting – four children – children living with father since 2011 – retention of one of the children by mother in May 2016 – separation of siblings – allegations of family violence – parental conflict – presumption of equal shared parental responsibility rebutted – children to live with father and spend time with the mother.
  • Eden & Kingston [2016] FCCA 2144

    19 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Children – interim parenting – four children – children living with father since 2011 – retention of one of the children by mother in May 2016 – separation of siblings – allegations of family violence – parental conflict – presumption of equal shared parental responsibility rebutted – children to live with father and spend time with the mother.

  • Shafaq v Milez Trading Group Pty Limited & Anor [2016] FCCA 2135

    18 August 2016

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application in a Case for default judgment – alleged contraventions of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – default judgment made.
  • Shafaq v Milez Trading Group Pty Limited & Anor [2016] FCCA 2135

    18 August 2016

    INDUSTRIAL LAW – Application in a Case for default judgment – alleged contraventions of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – default judgment made.

  • Owen & Owen [2016] FCCA 2130

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Property – sham transactions by husband – complex web of private companies and loans to and from those companies – transactions unravelled.
  • Owen & Owen [2016] FCCA 2130

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Property – sham transactions by husband – complex web of private companies and loans to and from those companies – transactions unravelled.

  • Mullen & Barley [2016] FCCA 2129

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Consent application to discharge child support agreement.
  • Mullen & Barley [2016] FCCA 2129

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Consent application to discharge child support agreement.

  • Maffle & Segal [2016] FCCA 2125

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – orders sought by applicant father – orders for sole parental responsibility and no time/communication spent by father with children sought by respondent mother – father has consistently refused to comply with orders of the Court – matter heard on an undefended basis – orders made for mother to have sole parental responsibility– orders made for father to have no time or communication with children – father’s application dismissed.
  • Maffle & Segal [2016] FCCA 2125

    18 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – orders sought by applicant father – orders for sole parental responsibility and no time/communication spent by father with children sought by respondent mother – father has consistently refused to comply with orders of the Court – matter heard on an undefended basis – orders made for mother to have sole parental responsibility– orders made for father to have no time or communication with children – father’s application dismissed.

  • Krysiak v Public Transport Authority of Western Australia [2016] FCCA 2121

    18 August 2016

    HUMAN RIGHTS – Disability discrimination – termination of the number 14 bus route.

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Interim injunction – whether basis for grant of interim injunction made out.
  • Krysiak v Public Transport Authority of Western Australia [2016] FCCA 2121

    18 August 2016

    HUMAN RIGHTS – Disability discrimination – termination of the number 14 bus route.

    PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Interim injunction – whether basis for grant of interim injunction made out.

  • The Owners - Strata Plan No 14120 v McCarthy (No. 2) [2016] FCCA 2007

    18 August 2016

    BANKRUPTCY – Final orders dismissing Creditor’s Petition consequent upon previous answers to two separate questions – s.229 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (NSW).
  • The Owners - Strata Plan No 14120 v McCarthy (No. 2) [2016] FCCA 2007

    18 August 2016

    BANKRUPTCY – Final orders dismissing Creditor’s Petition consequent upon previous answers to two separate questions – s.229 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (NSW).

  • WZATV v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2019

    18 August 2016

    IGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal – Indian citizen – sexual offences in Australia – alleged denial of procedural fairness by alleged failure to consider integer of claim or alleged failure to take into account a relevant consideration by reason of conviction for sexual offences in Australia and psychological harm if returned to India – alleged error in country information – allegation that Refugee Review Tribunal not “foresightful” – alleged error concerning future conduct of authorities in India – whether jurisdictional error concerning finding about placement on sex offenders’ register in India and consequences of involuntary removal from Australia – effect upon applicant’s safety in India of breach of privacy by release of personal data – effect of Indian Government’s position on sex offenders – writs issued.
  • WZATV v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2019

    18 August 2016

    IGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal – Indian citizen – sexual offences in Australia – alleged denial of procedural fairness by alleged failure to consider integer of claim or alleged failure to take into account a relevant consideration by reason of conviction for sexual offences in Australia and psychological harm if returned to India – alleged error in country information – allegation that Refugee Review Tribunal not “foresightful” – alleged error concerning future conduct of authorities in India – whether jurisdictional error concerning finding about placement on sex offenders’ register in India and consequences of involuntary removal from Australia – effect upon applicant’s safety in India of breach of privacy by release of personal data – effect of Indian Government’s position on sex offenders – writs issued.

  • SZUSW v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2100

    18 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review set down for final hearing – Applicant leaves Australia without current visa and not entitled to return – No point or purpose in maintaining the final hearing date – application dismissed.
  • SZUSW v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2100

    18 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Application for review set down for final hearing – Applicant leaves Australia without current visa and not entitled to return – No point or purpose in maintaining the final hearing date – application dismissed.

  • Torrobass Pty Ltd v Bramley & Anor [2016] FCCA 2097

    18 August 2016

    BANKRUPTCY – Bankruptcy Act 1966 – trustees consent to act under s.156A one day late – a mere formal defect or irregularity under s.306 – appropriate relief granted regularising appointment of trustees.
  • Torrobass Pty Ltd v Bramley & Anor [2016] FCCA 2097

    18 August 2016

    BANKRUPTCY – Bankruptcy Act 1966 – trustees consent to act under s.156A one day late – a mere formal defect or irregularity under s.306 – appropriate relief granted regularising appointment of trustees.

  • Nawaqaliva v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2080

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) not to grant applicant Other Family (Residence) (Subclass 836) visa ( Carer visa) – whether Tribunal misconstrued reg.1.15AA(1)(e) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) as it stood before 9 November 2009 by failing to consider whether sponsor’s Australian relatives were willing to provide assistance to the sponsor – jurisdictional error established.
  • Nawaqaliva v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2080

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal ( Tribunal) not to grant applicant Other Family (Residence) (Subclass 836) visa ( Carer visa) – whether Tribunal misconstrued reg.1.15AA(1)(e) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) as it stood before 9 November 2009 by failing to consider whether sponsor’s Australian relatives were willing to provide assistance to the sponsor – jurisdictional error established.

  • BPF15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2112

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – applicant alleges Tribunal breached s425 of the Migration Act.
  • BPF15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2112

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – applicant alleges Tribunal breached s425 of the Migration Act.

  • AYL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2062

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal – Sri Lankan citizen – unparticularised grounds of review – whether bias – whether wrong issue considered – whether failure to consider relevant material – failure of applicant to attend Tribunal hearing – whether Tribunal hearing invitation complied with statutory requirements – whether jurisdictional error.
  • AYL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2062

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal – Sri Lankan citizen – unparticularised grounds of review – whether bias – whether wrong issue considered – whether failure to consider relevant material – failure of applicant to attend Tribunal hearing – whether Tribunal hearing invitation complied with statutory requirements – whether jurisdictional error.

  • AUR15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2119

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – unparticularised grounds for review.
  • AUR15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2119

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – unparticularised grounds for review.

  • AML15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2115

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa.
  • AML15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2115

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa.

  • AYW15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2113

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – Tribunal’s treatment of credibility – breach of s425 – use of untranslated document.
  • AYW15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2113

    17 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – protection visa – Tribunal’s treatment of credibility – breach of s425 – use of untranslated document.

  • WZAUY v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2024

    16 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal to refuse Chinese citizen a protection visa – whether applicant denied procedural fairness – whether irrelevant considerations taken into account – whether jurisdictional error.
  • WZAUY v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2024

    16 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of former Refugee Review Tribunal to refuse Chinese citizen a protection visa – whether applicant denied procedural fairness – whether irrelevant considerations taken into account – whether jurisdictional error.

  • AFL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2086

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the Applicant’s evidence and his claims – whether the Tribunal failed to accord the Applicant procedural fairness – application for judicial review dismissed.
  • AFL15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2086

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the Applicant’s evidence and his claims – whether the Tribunal failed to accord the Applicant procedural fairness – application for judicial review dismissed.

  • BNU15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2085

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – application for protection visa – whether Tribunal failed to afford the Applicant procedural fairness – whether Tribunal failed to perform its statutory task – application dismissed.
  • BNU15 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2085

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – application for protection visa – whether Tribunal failed to afford the Applicant procedural fairness – whether Tribunal failed to perform its statutory task – application dismissed.

  • AMQ16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2084

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Migration & Refugees Division) – Protection (Class XA) visa – show cause hearing – real chance test – whether the Tribunal erred in making adverse credibility findings – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the correct test – whether the Tribunal’s decision lacked an evident and intelligible justification – no arguable jurisdictional error identified – application dismissed under r.44.12.
  • AMQ16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 2084

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Migration & Refugees Division) – Protection (Class XA) visa – show cause hearing – real chance test – whether the Tribunal erred in making adverse credibility findings – whether the Tribunal failed to apply the correct test – whether the Tribunal’s decision lacked an evident and intelligible justification – no arguable jurisdictional error identified – application dismissed under r.44.12.

  • Harding & Watson [2016] FCCA 1999

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Contravention alleged of parenting orders – contravention Applications dismissed – mother suffers from Bipolar and Delusional Disorder – consent to S.102QB Order – contested parenting issues – mother to have treatment and supervised time with child if treatment successful.
  • Harding & Watson [2016] FCCA 1999

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Contravention alleged of parenting orders – contravention Applications dismissed – mother suffers from Bipolar and Delusional Disorder – consent to S.102QB Order – contested parenting issues – mother to have treatment and supervised time with child if treatment successful.

  • O’Connor & Barker [2016] FCCA 2000

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting dispute – both parents have mental health problems – both have criminal priors – both previously used illegal drugs – ‘good enough’ parent.
  • O’Connor & Barker [2016] FCCA 2000

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting dispute – both parents have mental health problems – both have criminal priors – both previously used illegal drugs – ‘good enough’ parent.

  • Arhbal v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1963

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Visa – partner visa – ‘spouse’ – whether spousal relationship – whether Tribunal treated r.1.15A matters as “requirements” rather than factors to be considered – no error demonstrated.
  • Arhbal v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1963

    15 August 2016

    MIGRATION – Visa – partner visa – ‘spouse’ – whether spousal relationship – whether Tribunal treated r.1.15A matters as “requirements” rather than factors to be considered – no error demonstrated.

  • Casey & Casey [2016] FCCA 1998

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Property dispute – around 20 years cohabitation – husband made greater initial contribution – wife has greater needs – wife’s poor health – husband has greater income earning capacity – wife unlikely to earn a significant income, unlike the husband – wife has overwhelming needs.
  • Casey & Casey [2016] FCCA 1998

    15 August 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Property dispute – around 20 years cohabitation – husband made greater initial contribution – wife has greater needs – wife’s poor health – husband has greater income earning capacity – wife unlikely to earn a significant income, unlike the husband – wife has overwhelming needs.