{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
FEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
FEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2025] HCA 13
Tags
No tags available
Case
FEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2025] HCA 13
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, STEWARD, GLEESON AND JAGOT JJFEL17 APPELLANTANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND RESPONDENTMULTICULTURAL AFFAIRSFEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs[2025] HCA 13Date of Hearing: 6 December 2024Date of Judgment: 9 April 2025S107/2024ORDERAppeal dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationD H Godwin with B M Flaherty for the appellant (instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills)P M Knowles SC with K N Hooper for the respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSFEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural AffairsImmigration – Protection visas – Invalid application – Where appellant applied for protection visa and was refused by delegate of Minister – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision – Where Assistant Minister exercised power under s 417(1) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to substitute more "favourable" decision and granted appellant three-month visitor visa with no further stay condition – Where appellant made second application for protection visa – Where delegate found second application invalid under s 48A – Whether majority of Full Court of Federal Court of Australia erred in finding second application invalid and barred by s 48A – Whether act of refusal in s 48A is reference to historical fact of refusal, or reference to act of refusal which remains legally valid – Whether exercise of substitution power under s 417(1) had effect of setting aside original refusal decision.Words and phrases – "barred", "continuing legal effect",...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
FEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2025] HCA 13
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, STEWARD, GLEESON AND JAGOT JJFEL17 APPELLANTANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND RESPONDENTMULTICULTURAL AFFAIRSFEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs[2025] HCA 13Date of Hearing: 6 December 2024Date of Judgment: 9 April 2025S107/2024ORDERAppeal dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationD H Godwin with B M Flaherty for the appellant (instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills)P M Knowles SC with K N Hooper for the respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSFEL17 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural AffairsImmigration – Protection visas – Invalid application – Where appellant applied for protection visa and was refused by delegate of Minister – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision – Where Assistant Minister exercised power under s 417(1) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to substitute more "favourable" decision and granted appellant three-month visitor visa with no further stay condition – Where appellant made second application for protection visa – Where delegate found second application invalid under s 48A – Whether majority of Full Court of Federal Court of Australia erred in finding second application invalid and barred by s 48A – Whether act of refusal in s 48A is reference to historical fact of refusal, or reference to act of refusal which remains legally valid – Whether exercise of substitution power under s 417(1) had effect of setting aside original refusal decision.Words and phrases – "barred", "continuing legal effect",...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>