Federal Court. Was it an irrelevant consideration for the Tribunal to take into account the Appellant's future intentions when determining whether he intended genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily pursuant to cl 500.212(a)(iv) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)?
Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:
Question 1: Where a statute confers a discretion which in its terms is unconfined, such as cl 500.212(a)(iv) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), can it be said that "the factors that may be taken into account in the exercise of the discretion are similarly unconfined, except in so far as there may be found in the subject-matter, scope and purpose of the statute some implied limitation on the factors to which the decision-maker may legitimately have regard"?
Question 2: Was it "an irrelevant consideration for the Tribunal to take into account his future intentions when determining whether he intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily" pursuant to cl 500.212(a)(iv)?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: