Federal Court. Does a judicial review applicant need to provide extended written or oral submissions on a topic for it to be sufficiently clear that a serious representation is being made? Is it open to the Tribunal to ignore a claim made pursuant to s 501CA(4), on the basis of the lack of supporting evidence provided to support that claim? Could the risk of infection from covid-19, when weighed with other factors, provide “another reason” for revoking the visa cancellation within s 501CA(4), depending on the circumstances of the case?
Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:
Question 1: In the context of a claim made under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), does a judicial review applicant need to provide extended written or oral submissions on a topic for it to be sufficiently clear that a serious representation is being made?
Question 2: In the context of a claim made under s 501CA(4), is it open to the Tribunal to ignore it on the basis of the lack of supporting evidence provided to support that claim?
Question 3: As part of the Appellant's claim to the Tribunal, he argued that, if the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse to revoke under s 501CA(4) the mandatory cancellation of his visa and he therefore were returned to India, he would be at risk of harm in that country from covid-19. Could the risk of infection from covid-19 in India, when weighed with other factors, provide “another reason” for revoking the visa cancellation within s 501CA(4), depending on the circumstances of the case?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: