CCB16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCAFC 183 (22 October 2019) (Besanko, Steward and Abraham JJ) - 13wentworthselbornechambers
17086
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-17086,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,qode-theme-ver-16.8,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_top,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-5.5.2,vc_responsive
 

CCB16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCAFC 183 (22 October 2019) (Besanko, Steward and Abraham JJ)


Catchwords:


MIGRATION — appeal from an order made by a judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissing the appellants’ application for judicial review — where the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed a decision of the delegate of the Minister not to grant protection visas to the appellants

MIGRATION — whether the primary judge erred in failing to find that the decision of the Tribunal was affected by jurisdictional error in that the failure to disclose the existence of a certificate issued pursuant to s 438(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to the appellants constituted a denial of procedural fairness — where the first respondent accepted that the Tribunal’s failure to disclose the existence of the certificate to the appellants amounted to a breach of its implied obligation of procedural fairness — where the first respondent filed a notice of contention asserting that the breach was not material because the Tribunal expressly gave no weight to the information the subject of the notification and because the Tribunal had a separate and independent basis for its decision

MIGRATION — new ground of appeal — whether the primary judge erred or denied the appellants procedural fairness by failing to address the grounds of the appellants’ application — where the appellants contended that it was not reasonably open to the Tribunal to conclude that the provision of evidence within the time frame fixed by the Tribunal undermined the weight to be placed on that evidence