Ibrahim v Minister for Home Affairs

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtFull Federal Court (Australia)
Judgment Date30 May 2019
Neutral Citation[2019] FCAFC 89
Date30 May 2019
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
50 cases
  • Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v FAK19
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • 23 August 2021
    ...their views as to the correctness of Ali v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 109; 278 FCR 627, Ibrahim v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCAFC 89; 270 FCR 12 and BCR16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 96; 248 FCR 456, it is strictly unnecessary to consider......
  • CWY20 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 23 December 2020
    ...v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 108 Ibrahim v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCAFC 89; 270 FCR 12 Ibrahim v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) [2017] FCA 1218; 256 FCR 50 Madafferi v Minister for Immigrati......
  • Ali v Minister for Home Affairs
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • 29 June 2020
    ...Affairs [2020] FCA 415 Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) 264 CLR 123 Ibrahim v Minister for Home Affairs (2019) 270 FCR 12 MacCormick v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1945) 71 CLR 283 Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24 Mini......
  • Acting Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v CWY20
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • 9 November 2021
    ...in the subsequent balancing exercise (PJ at [136]–[137]).61 The primary judge noted that in Ibrahim v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCAFC 89; (2019) 270 FCR 12 at [114], the Full Court of this Court held that it was necessary for the Assistant Minister to have a correct understanding of ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT