Best interests of children weighing against revocation?

Federal Court. In reviewing a decision made under s 501CA(4), did the Tribunal deny the appellant procedural fairness by failing to put him on notice of an adverse conclusion which was not obvious on the material, namely that the “best interests of the children consideration” might be a factor against him?

Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:

Question 1: Does the Tribunal conduct a review of a delegate's decision, instead of a review of the delegate’s reasons for decision?

Question 2: Was the requirement under s 360(1) and s 425(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to invite an applicant “to give evidence and present arguments in relation to the issues arising in relation to the decision under review” similar to the requirement under s 39(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) to ensure that an applicant is given a reasonable opportunity to present his/her case, at least in the circumstances of this case?

Question 3: Was it legitimate for the Tribunal to be guided by the parties as to the salient issues and to accept relevant admissions?

Question 4: If the answer to Question 3 is 'yes', does it follow that the Tribunal could "permit the parties to place it in the position of deciding a case on an artificial or inadequate basis"?

Question 5: Are the issues before the Tribunal "framed by the statutory scheme, by the course of the anterior administrative decision-making process, and by the course of the proceeding on review"?

Question 6: If the answer to Question 5 is 'yes', is the content of what is required to ensure procedural fairness necessarily framed by those issues?

The FCA answered those questions as follows:

The remainder of this article is only available to Case Law and Platinum subscribers.

Read our Terms & Conditions and upgrade below:

Monthly Subscriptions

Premium
Basic Content
Premium Content
-
-
$ 29 /month
Subscribe
Case Law
Basic Content
-
Case Law Content
-
$ 49 / month
Subscribe
Platinum
Basic Content
Premium Content
Case Law Content
Save $ 9 / month
$ 69 / month
Subscribe

Annual Subscriptions

Premium
Basic Content
Premium Content
-
Save $ 49 / year
$ 299 / year
Subscribe
Case Law
Basic Content
-
Case Law Content
Save $ 89 / year
$ 499 / year
Subscribe
Platinum
Basic Content
Premium Content
Case Law Content
Save $ 237 / year
$ 699 / year
Subscribe

 

Where GST applies, the above amounts are inclusive of GST.

Content Types

Basic Content includes basic news, some media articles and selected announcements.

Premium Content includes all our content, except for Case Law Content. In other words, it includes Basic Content, plus all our articles on legislative and policy changes, industry updates and the Migration Legislation Tracker.

Case Law Content includes Basic Content, plus case law summaries, analysis and extract, but does not include Premium Content.

Platinum Content includes Basic Content, plus Premium Content, plus Case Law Content. In other words, it includes ALL our content.

If you already have a Case Law or Platinum subscription, click on 'Login' below.

Previous articleDuty of care owed to limit duration of detention?
Next articleDiscretion in s 34 of Citizenship Act: mandatory matters?