Digests
Top Posts
Contrary to Minister for Home Affairs v Omar, did the Tribunal fail to consider a substantial or significant claim concerning the risk of harm to appellant if returned to his country of nationality independently of Australia’s non-refoulement obligations?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Did the Tribunal fail to carry out it's statutory function by failing to consider the appellant’s representations pursuant to Section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), in support of his request for revocation of the mandatory cancellation of visa?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Is a decision made by a Departmental officer in purported compliance with the 2016 Guidelines concerning Section 351 of the Migration Act, 1958 (Cth) amenable to judicial review for legal unreasonableness?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Was the Minister’s decision legally unreasonable because the appellant was not found to be a person whom the Minister considered a danger to Australia’s security within s 36(1C) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Djokovic challenges Ministers Cancellation of his Visa due to his Anti-Vaccination stance.
Djokovic challenges Ministers Cancellation of his Visa due to his Anti-Vaccination stance.
Victorian Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Extended to March 15, 2022
Victorian Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Extended to March 15, 2022
Applicant for Bail Charged with Domestic Violence
Applicant for Bail Charged with Domestic Violence
Applicant Opposes Refusal of Application to Re-Join Police Service
Applicant Opposes Refusal of Application to Re-Join Police Service
Does Section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act, 1967 (Cth) prohibit the Minister from using personal or specialised knowledge, or commonly accepted knowledge, in determining whether the Minister is satisfied that there is "another reason" for revocation?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
By virtue of Section 500(6H) of the Migration Act, 1958 (Cth), is it legally unreasonable, illogical or erroneous for a Tribunal not to have exercised it's discretion to obtain information from appellant to “fill in” the evidentiary gap that he had left?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Where Minister cancelled applicant's visa pursuant to Section 133C of the Migration Act, 1958 (Cth), was he satisfied that a ground for cancelling the visa under section 116 exists and whether it is in the public interest to do so?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
Was the Minister satisfied that a ground for cancelling a visa exists and that it would be in the public interest to do so under Section 116(1)(e)(i) and Section 133C(3)(b) of the Migration Act, 1958 (Cth), respectively?
  •  ·  YJ, Lim
  •  · 
517-528
SSL Certificates