Federal Court. Does FCA have jurisdiction to review a delegate's decision to refuse under s 501CA(4) to revoke the mandatory cancellation of a visa made under s 501(3A)? Can the self-represented Applicant's notice of appeal from the Minister's decision be treated, in substance, as: a notice of appeal from the Tribunal's decision; including an application for a time extension under s 477A(2)(a)? How should the FCA approach poorly-cast grounds of judicial review? Is the Tribunal required to conduct hearings in person?
Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:
Question 1: Does the FCA have jurisdiction to judicial review of a delegate's decision to refuse under s 501CA(4) to revoke the mandatory cancellation of a visa made under s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)?
Question 2: Can the self-represented Applicant's notice of appeal from the Minister's decision be treated, in substance, as a notice of appeal from the Tribunal's decision?
Question 3: Can the self-represented Applicant's notice of appeal be treated, in substance, as including an application for a time extension under s 477A(2)(a)?
Question 4: Do the Commonwealth's obligations as a model litigant "include a duty to not take “advantage of a claimant who lacks the resources to litigate a legitimate claim"?
Question 5: How should the FCA approach poorly-cast grounds of judicial review?
Question 6: Is the Tribunal required to conduct hearings in person?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: