Minister for Home Affairs v. DUA16 & Anor
Minister for Home Affairs v. CHK16 & Anor
Case No.
M57/2020; M58/2020
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
10/12/2019 Federal Court of Australia (Griffiths, Mortimer & Wheelahan JJ)
Catchwords
Migration law – Third party fraud – Where migration agent (“Agent”) acting for each of respondents provided “submissions” to Immigration Assessment Authority (“IAA”) on their behalf – Where “submissions” pro forma and contained information that did not relate to respondents – Where there was no evidence that respondents had asked Agent to make particular “submissions” to IAA, nor evidence that either respondent wanted to provide “new information” to IAA – Where Full Court of Federal Court held that Agent engaged in fraudulent conduct and dismissed appeal from decision of Federal Circuit Court to quash IAA’s decisions in respondents’ cases on ground that they were stultified by Agent’s fraud – Whether Agent’s fraudulent conduct in how respondents’ cases put to IAA stultified, disabled, or subverted IAA’s review of Minister’s delegate’s decision – Status and significance of “submissions” in assessing effect of fraudulent conduct on IAA’s review processes.
Documents*
29/05/2020 Hearing (SLA, Brisbane and video connection)
12/06/2020 Notices of appeal
17/07/2020 Joint written submissions (Appellant)
17/07/2020 Chronology - DUA16 (Appellant)
17/07/2020 Chronology - CHK16 (Appellant)
14/08/2020 Written submissions (Respondents)
04/09/2020 Reply
14/10/2020 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
14/10/2020 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
14/10/2020 Outline of oral argument (Respondents)
09/12/2020 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v. EFX17
Case No.
B43/2020
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
16/12/2019 Federal Court of Australia (Greenwood, Rares and Logan JJ)
Catchwords
Migration law –Visa cancellation –Character test –Migration Act 1958(Cth) ss496,501, 501CA –Notice of cancellation –Where Minister’s delegate made decision under s 501(3A) to cancel respondent’s protection visa while respondent serving sentence of imprisonment –Where pursuant to duties in s 501CA(3) Minister caused to be given to respondent written notice containing notification of cancellation decision, relevant information as to reason for decision, and invitation to make representations about revocation of cancellation decision–Where notice given to respondent by officer of Queensland Corrective Services –Where respondent commenced proceedings in Federal Circuit Court challenging validity of notice –Where Circuit Court dismissed challenge –Where appeal to Full Court of Federal Court allowed by majority –Whether Minister, in performing duties under s 501CA(3), must have regard to matters relating to former visa holder’s capacity, including literacy, capacity to understand English, mental capacity and health, and facilities available to them in custody–Whether fulfilment of duties in s 501CA(3) dependent on former visa holder’s ability to comprehend notice, particulars, and invitation to make representations –Whether valid performance of duties in s 501CA(3) conditional on person performing them holding delegated authority under s 496(1) or whether s 497 applicable
Documents*
03/07/2020 Hearing (SLA, Sydney)
17/07/2020 Notice of appeal
21/08//2020 Written submissions (Appellant)
21/08//2020 Chronology (Appellant)
18/09/2020 Written submissions (Respondent)
09/10/2020 Reply
04/12/2020 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
04/12/2020 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
04/12/2020 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
10/03/2021 Judgment (Judgment summary)
The Commissioner of Taxation for the Commonwealth of Australia v. Travelex Limited
Case No.
S116/2020
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
14/02/2020 Federal Court of Australia (Kenny, Derrington and Steward JJ)
Catchwords
Taxation –Overpayments –Interest –Where supplies which were GST-free wrongly included in Business Activity Statement –Where on 28 June 2012 Commissioner allocated credit of$149,020 to respondent’s Running Balance Account (“RBA”) and recorded “effective date” of allocation as 16 December2009 –Whether Commissioner’s actions on 28 June 2012, even if made in error and unreflective of any entitlement under a taxation law on part of respondent, created obligation on part of Commissioner to refund “RBA surplus” within meaning of Pt IIB of Taxation Administration Act 1953(Cth) and entitlement on part of respondent to interest under Taxation (Interest on Overpayments and Early Payments) Act 1983(Cth).
Documents*
25/06/2020 Determination (SLA, Sydney)
09/07/2020 Notice of appeal
13/08/2020 Written submissions (Appellant)
13/08/2020 Chronology (Appellant)
10/09/2020 Written submissions (Respondent)
01/10/2020 Reply
02/12/2020 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra) (Audio-visual recording)
02/12/2020 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
02/12/2020 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
10/03/2021 Judgment (Judgment summary)
Audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra
Case: Private R v. Cowen & Anor
Date: 30 June 2020
Transcript: Hearing
AV time: 4h 7m
You accept the terms of use (below) by playing this audio-visual recording.
Terms of use
Access to the audio-visual recordings of the Court is subject to the following conditions:
(1) You will not record, copy, modify, reproduce, publish, republish, upload, post, transmit, broadcast, rebroadcast, store, distribute or otherwise make available, in any manner, any proceeding or part of any proceeding, other than with prior written approval of the Court. However, schools and universities may broadcast/rebroadcast proceedings in a classroom setting for educational purposes without prior written approval.
(2) The audio-visual material available via our web-site of Court proceedings does not constitute the official record of the Court.
(3) Copyright of the footage of the proceedings is retained by the Court.
By clicking "play" (the triangle controls on the video player), you agree to be bound by these terms of use.
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v. Makasa
Case No.
S103/2020
Case Information
Lower Court Judgment
28/02/2020 Federal Court of Australia (Allsop CJ, Kenny, Besanko, Bromwich and Banks-Smith JJ)
Catchwords
Migration law – Visa cancellation – Character test – Substantial criminal record – Where Minister’s delegate cancelled respondent’s visa on character grounds – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“AAT”) set aside delegate’s decision and decided not to cancel visa – Where Minister subsequently personally purported to cancel respondent’s visa – Whether the Minister can re-exercise discretion conferred by s 501(2) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to cancel person’s visa where AAT has previously set aside Minister’s delegate’s earlier decision to cancel visa under s 501(2) – If yes, whether Minister can rely on same offences (going to whether person has substantial criminal record for purposes of character test) to enliven discretion in s 501(2) as AAT relied upon when reviewing delegate’s decision.
Documents
12/06/2020 Determination (SLA, Melbourne)
24/06/2020 Notice of appeal
31/07/2020 Written submissions (Appellant)
31/07/2020 Chronology (Appellant)
28/08/2020 Written submissions (Respondent)
18/09/2020 Reply
12/11/2020 Hearing (Full Court, Canberra)
(Including pronouncement of orders)
12/11/2020 Outline of oral argument (Appellant)
12/11/2020 Outline of oral argument (Respondent)
03/02/2021 Reasons for Judgment (Judgment summary)