BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Judgment Date | 31 March 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] FCAFC 54 |
| Date | 31 March 2020 |
| Court | Full Federal Court (Australia) |
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCAFC 54
|
Appeal from: |
BFH16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCCA 730 and BFI16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCCA 731 |
|
|
|
|
File numbers: |
VID 403 of 2019 VID 407 of 2019 |
|
|
|
|
Judges: |
MURPHY, O'BRYAN AND SNADEN JJ |
|
|
|
|
Date of judgment: |
31 March 2020 |
|
|
|
|
Catchwords: |
MIGRATION – refugees – protection visa – refusal to grant protection visa under section 65 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - Administrative Appeals Tribunal – review by Tribunal under Pt 7 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – appeal from Federal Circuit Court of Australia – applicants’ claim for protection grounded on claim to be member of particular social group, being homosexuals in Pakistan – appeals allowed – matters remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – administrative law – judicial review – jurisdictional error – whether decision by Tribunal unreasonable, irrational or illogical – whether certain factual findings made by the Tribunal lacked an evident and intelligible justification or the reasoning was not open on the evidence or lacked a logical connection between the evidence and the conclusions drawn – applicable principles – whether evidence of particular facts rationally probative of a fact in issue – materiality of reasoning in error – writ of certiorari issued – writ of mandamus issued |
|
|
|
|
Legislation: |
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) |
|
|
|
|
Cases cited: |
ARG15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2016) 250 FCR 109 Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321 BFH16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCCA 730 BFI16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCCA 731 BZD17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 263 FCR 292 DAO16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 258 FCR 175 DYS16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 260 FCR 260 EHF17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1681 Goldsmith v Sandilands (2002) 190 ALR 370 Guo v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 64 FCR 151 Harrington-Smith v Western Australia (No 7) (2003) 130 FCR 424 Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 264 CLR 123 Kopalapillai v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 86 FCR 547 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh (2014) 231 FCR 437 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Stretton (2016) 237 FCR 1 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA (2019) 264 CLR 421 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZVFW (2018) 264 CLR 541 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZMDS (2010) 240 CLR 611 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu (1999) 197 CLR 611 Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia (2003) 211 CLR 476 Randhawa v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1994) 52 FCR 437 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Applicant S20/2002 (2003) 73 ALD 1 Selvadurai v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1994) 34 ALD 347 |
|
|
|
|
Date of hearing: |
27 February 2020 |
|
|
|
|
Date of last submissions: |
20 February 2020 |
|
|
|
|
Registry: |
|
|
|
|
|
Division: |
|
|
|
|
|
National Practice Area: |
|
|
|
|
|
Category: |
Catchwords |
|
|
|
|
Number of paragraphs: |
71 |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Appellants: |
Ms E Latif |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Appellants |
Carina Ford Immigration Lawyers |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the First Respondent: |
Mr N Wood |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the First Respondent: |
Australian Government Solicitor |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Second Respondent: |
The Second Respondent filed a submitting notice save as to costs |
ORDERS
|
|
VID 403 of 2019 |
|
|
|
||
|
BETWEEN: |
BFH16 Appellant
|
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
|
|
JUDGEs: |
MURPHY, O’BRYAN AND SNADEN JJ |
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
31 march 2020 |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
-
The appeal be allowed.
-
Paragraph 2 of the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made on 29 March 2019 be set aside and, in lieu thereof, the following orders be made:
-
A writ of certiorari issue directed to the second respondent quashing the decision of the second respondent dated 29 April 2016 (case number 1417176).
-
A writ of mandamus issue directed to the second respondent requiring it to determine, according to law, the application made to it by the appellant for review of the decision of a delegate of the first respondent made on 1 October 2014 under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
-
Paragraph 2 of the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made on 1 April 2019 be set aside and, in lieu thereof, the following order be made:
The first respondent pay the appellant’s costs of the Federal Circuit Court proceeding.
-
The first respondent pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal.
-
The name of the first respondent be changed to ‘Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs’.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
ORDERS
|
|
VID 407 of 2019 |
|
|
|
||
|
BETWEEN: |
BFI16 Appellant |
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION First Respondent ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Second Respondent
|
|
|
JUDGEs: |
murphy, o’bryan and snaden jj |
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
31 march 2020 |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
-
The appeal be allowed.
-
Paragraph 2 of the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made on 29 March 2019 be set aside and, in lieu thereof, the following orders be made:
-
A writ of certiorari issue directed to the second respondent quashing the decision of the second respondent dated 29 April 2016 (case number 1417175).
-
A writ of mandamus issue directed to the second respondent requiring it to determine, according to law, the application made to it by the appellant for review of the decision of a delegate of the first respondent made on 1 October 2014 under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
-
Paragraph 2 of the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made on 1 April 2019 be set aside and, in lieu thereof, the following order be made:
The first respondent pay the appellant’s costs of the Federal Circuit Court proceeding.
-
The first respondent pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal.
-
The name of the first respondent be changed to ‘Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs’.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MURPHY AND O’BRYAN JJ:
IntroductionThe appellants, designated BFH16 and BFI16 to keep their identity confidential, appeal from orders made by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia on 29 March 2019, dismissing applications for judicial review of decisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) made on 29 April 2016. The Tribunal had affirmed decisions of a...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
BHL19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
...Protection [2019] FCAFC 27 BAL19 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 2189 BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCAFC 54 BFW20 by his Litigation Representative BFW20A v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 56......
-
Gardiner v Taungurung Land and Waters Council
...v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 133; 266 FCR 83 BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCAFC 54 Bright v Northern Land Council [2018] FCA 752 Carrascalao v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 107; 252 FCR 352 Corun......
-
Stewart v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
...Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1176 BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCAFC 54 BHL19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 94 Commissioner of Taxes (Vic) v Lennon [1921......
-
Hillis v Minister for Home Affairs
...Protection v Splendido (2019) 271 FCR 595; [2019] FCAFC 132 BFH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2020) 274 FCR 532; [2020] FCAFC 54 BHL19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (2020) 277 FCR 420; [2020] FCAFC 94 Brett Cattle C......