Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtHigh Court
JudgeFrench CJ,Hayne,Kiefel,Bell JJ.,Gageler J
Judgment Date08 May 2013
Neutral Citation[2013] HCA 18,2013-0508 HCA D
Docket NumberB68/2012
Date08 May 2013
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
524 cases
  • Australian Communications and Media Authority v Today FM (Sydney) Pty Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 4 March 2015
    ...179(3) of the BSA. 128Kruger v The Commonwealth (1997) 190 CLR 1 at 36; [1997] HCA 27; Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332 at 370–371 [88]–[92]; [2013] HCA 129 Section 178(2) of the BSA. See (2014) 218 FCR 461 at 484 [95]–[96]. 130 Timbarra Protection Coalition ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
  • Administrative law developments
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 15 January 2015
    ...1988 and related legislation. Following the High Court of Australia's 2013 decision in Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332, several cases have further considered the concept of legal unreasonableness in decisions as a basis for judicial review. Minister for Immi......
  • Construction & Infrastructure News - 9 October 2018
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 11 October 2018
    ...to carry out work illegal under the conditions of permit — Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li & Anor [2014] FCAFC 1; (2013) 249 CLR 332, considered — Order made quashing variations. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Implementation of executive policy — Non-statutory moratorium prohibiting......
  • High Court clarifies challenging security of payment scheme adjudications
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 12 March 2018
    ..."which lacks an evident and intelligible justification." (Bouygues, quoting Minister for Immigration & Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332 (Hayne, Kiefel and Bell JJ) 367 [76].) In Bouygues, the alleged error occurred when the adjudicator determined that the parties had agreed......
  • High Court revives Wednesbury unreasonableness
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 22 July 2013
    ...of unreasonableness, rationality and logicality in judicial review. The High Court in Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li [2013] HCA 18 found that the failure by the Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) to grant an adjournment to an applicant was unreasonable and rendered the Tribunal'......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
21 books & journal articles
  • The 2017 Winterton Lecture. Sir Owen Dixon Today
    • Australia
    • University of Western Australia Law Review Nbr. 43-1, January 2018
    • 1 January 2018
    ...HCA 54. See, further, Certain Lloyd’s Underwriters v Cross (2012) 248 CLR 378, [24], [70]; [2012] HCA 56; Minister for Immigration v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332, [67]; [2013] HCA 18. 99Spriggs v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 239 CLR 1, [79]; [2009] HCA 22; Federal Commissioner of Taxati......
  • The use and Enforcement of Soft Law by Australian Public Authorities
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review Nbr. 42-1, March 2014
    • 1 March 2014
    ...that it would apply a more relaxed version of the Wednesbury ground in future in Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Xiujuan Li (2013) 87 ALJR 618. 91 See McMilla n, above n 47. This possibility will be examined in Part IV. 92 (2 011) 192 FCR 173 ('Khan v MIAC'). 93 Th e manager had ......
  • Three Decades of Tension: From the Codification of Migration Decision-Making to an Overarching Framework for Judicial Review
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review Nbr. 48-3, September 2020
    • 1 September 2020
    ...Yusuf (n 109) 351; and Gleeson CJ’s later discussion of illogicality, irrationality andunreasonableness in S20/2002 (n 111) [20].113. (2013) 249 CLR 332 (‘Li’).114. Ibid 347 (French CJ), 357 (Hayne, Kiefel and Bell JJ).414 Federal Law Review would be severely limited in their ability to int......
  • Re-Evaluating the Doctrine of Deference in Administrative Law
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review Nbr. 45-4, December 2017
    • 1 December 2017
    ...other, political mechanisms for holding the legislative and executive branches to account. Thus, he argued that in deciding whether 3 (2013) 249 CLR 332 (‘Li’). 4 See, eg, Chris Wheeler, ‘Judicial Review of Administrative Action: An Administrative Decision-Maker’s Perspective’ (Paper presen......
  • 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