{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
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
Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
[2018] HCA 34
Tags
No tags available
Case
Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
[2018] HCA 34
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAKIEFEL CJ,GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE AND EDELMAN JJSORWAR HOSSAIN APPELLANTANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR RESPONDENTSHossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection[2018] HCA 3415 August 2018S1/2018ORDERThe appeal is dismissed with costs. On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationG O'L Reynolds SC with B M Zipser and D P Hume for the appellant (instructed by Mooney & Kennedy Solicitors)C J Horan QC with T Reilly for the first respondent (instructed by Sparke Helmore Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondent Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSHossain v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionMigration – Partner visa – Criteria prescribed for grant of visa – Where Minister for Immigration and Border Protection must refuse to grant visa if not satisfied that criteria prescribed for grant of visa met – Where delegate of Minister refused to grant visa – Review of decision by Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Where Tribunal not satisfied that visa application made within 28 days or that there were compelling reasons for not applying that criterion – Where Tribunal also not satisfied that visa applicant did not have outstanding debts to the Commonwealth or that appropriate arrangements had been made for payment of debts – Where Tribunal made error of law by assessing whether compelling reasons existed as at time of visa application instead of as at time of Tribunal's decision – Whether error of law in relation to...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
[2018] HCA 34
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAKIEFEL CJ,GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE AND EDELMAN JJSORWAR HOSSAIN APPELLANTANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR RESPONDENTSHossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection[2018] HCA 3415 August 2018S1/2018ORDERThe appeal is dismissed with costs. On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationG O'L Reynolds SC with B M Zipser and D P Hume for the appellant (instructed by Mooney & Kennedy Solicitors)C J Horan QC with T Reilly for the first respondent (instructed by Sparke Helmore Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondent Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSHossain v Minister for Immigration and Border ProtectionMigration – Partner visa – Criteria prescribed for grant of visa – Where Minister for Immigration and Border Protection must refuse to grant visa if not satisfied that criteria prescribed for grant of visa met – Where delegate of Minister refused to grant visa – Review of decision by Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Where Tribunal not satisfied that visa application made within 28 days or that there were compelling reasons for not applying that criterion – Where Tribunal also not satisfied that visa applicant did not have outstanding debts to the Commonwealth or that appropriate arrangements had been made for payment of debts – Where Tribunal made error of law by assessing whether compelling reasons existed as at time of visa application instead of as at time of Tribunal's decision – Whether error of law in relation to...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>