DWN042 v The Republic of Nauru

Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru – Where Supreme Court of Nauru failed to consider notice of motion – Whether failure to consider notice of motion involved denial of procedural fairness – Whether primary judge entitled to treat notice of motion as abandoned – Whether appeal could be dismissed because proper hearing could not have produced different result – Whether appeal incompetent because it would require consideration of interpretation and effect of Constitution of Nauru – Whether failure to consider complementary protection claim – Whether reliance on unsigned and unsworn transfer interview form constituted breach of requirements of procedural fairness.

Words and phrases – "appeal", "arbitrary deprivation of life", "assurances to the court", "complementary protection", "denial of procedural fairness", "extortion by the Taliban", "interpretation or effect of the Constitution of Nauru", "notice of motion", "original jurisdiction", "transfer interview form", "unconstitutional nature of detention".

Appeals Act 1972 (Nr) – ss 44(a), 44(b), 45(a).

Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth) – ss 5, 8.

Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the Republic of Nauru Relating to Appeals to the High Court of Australia from the Supreme Court of Nauru (1976) – Art 1(A)(b)(i), Art 1(A)(b)(ii), Art 2(a).

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – ss 4(2), 5, 43(1).

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) – Art 6.