{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship 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
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs
[2023] HCA 37
Tags
No tags available
Case
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs
[2023] HCA 37
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, EDELMAN, STEWARD, GLEESON, JAGOT AND BEECH‑JONES JJNZYQ PLAINTIFFANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ANOR DEFENDANTSNZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs[2023] HCA 37Date of Hearing: 7 & 8 November 2023Date of Order: 8 November 2023Date of Publication of Reasons: 28 November 2023S28/2023ORDERThe questions stated for the opinion of the Full Court in the further amended special case filed on 31 October 2023 be answered as follows:Question 1: On their proper construction, did sections 189(1) and 196(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) authorise the detention of the plaintiff as at 30 May 2023?Answer: Yes, subject to section 3A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Question 2:If so, are those provisions beyond the legislative power of the Commonwealth insofar as they applied to the plaintiff as at 30 May 2023?Answer:Yes.Question 3:On their proper construction, do sections 189(1) and 196(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) authorise the current detention of the plaintiff?Answer:Yes, subject to section 3A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Question 4:If so, are those provisions beyond the legislative power of the Commonwealth insofar as they currently apply to the plaintiff?Answer:Yes.Question 5:What, if any, relief should be granted to the plaintiff?Answer:The following orders should be made:(1)It is declared that, by reason of there having been and continuing to be no real prospect of the removal of the plaintiff from Australia becoming practicable in the reasonably foreseeable future:(a)the plaintiff's detention was unlawful as at 30 May 2023; and(b)the plaintiff's continued detention is unlawful...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs
[2023] HCA 37
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAGELER CJ,GORDON, EDELMAN, STEWARD, GLEESON, JAGOT AND BEECH‑JONES JJNZYQ PLAINTIFFANDMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS & ANOR DEFENDANTSNZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs[2023] HCA 37Date of Hearing: 7 & 8 November 2023Date of Order: 8 November 2023Date of Publication of Reasons: 28 November 2023S28/2023ORDERThe questions stated for the opinion of the Full Court in the further amended special case filed on 31 October 2023 be answered as follows:Question 1: On their proper construction, did sections 189(1) and 196(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) authorise the detention of the plaintiff as at 30 May 2023?Answer: Yes, subject to section 3A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Question 2:If so, are those provisions beyond the legislative power of the Commonwealth insofar as they applied to the plaintiff as at 30 May 2023?Answer:Yes.Question 3:On their proper construction, do sections 189(1) and 196(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) authorise the current detention of the plaintiff?Answer:Yes, subject to section 3A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).Question 4:If so, are those provisions beyond the legislative power of the Commonwealth insofar as they currently apply to the plaintiff?Answer:Yes.Question 5:What, if any, relief should be granted to the plaintiff?Answer:The following orders should be made:(1)It is declared that, by reason of there having been and continuing to be no real prospect of the removal of the plaintiff from Australia becoming practicable in the reasonably foreseeable future:(a)the plaintiff's detention was unlawful as at 30 May 2023; and(b)the plaintiff's continued detention is unlawful...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>