FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Le v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1260
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
Appellant | |
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
|
|
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Leave is given to extend the time within which to serve the notice of appeal, to 26 August 2011.
2. The appeal is dismissed.
3. The appellant pay the first respondent’s costs of the appeal, to be taxed in default of agreement.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.
|
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY |
|
|
GENERAL DIVISION |
VID 736 of 2010 |
|
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
BETWEEN: |
VIET HA LE Appellant |
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP First Respondent MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL Second Respondent |
|
JUDGE: |
MARSHALL J |
|
DATE: |
17 NOVEMBER 2010 |
|
PLACE: |
MELBOURNE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 The issues which arise in this matter are materially identical to the issues addressed in Ong v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCA 1259 which was heard and determined immediately prior to the hearing in this matter.
2 For the reasons given in Ong the same orders will be made in this matter as in Ong.
3 The factual circumstances relevant to this matter do not vary from those in Ong in any relevant respect. The Tribunal officer who refused the fee waiver application considered the material placed before him by the appellant but declined to grant that application.
4 The Tribunal determined correctly that it had no jurisdiction to entertain a review of the decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister to refuse the appellant a Temporary Business Entry visa. The Court below determined correctly that the Tribunal had no power to hear a review of the delegate’s decision in the absence of a fee waiver or the payment of the prescribed fee. The appeal is without merit and must be dismissed. For the reasons referred to in Ong at [14], the appellant is granted an extension of time within which to serve the appeal.
|
I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Marshall. |
Associate: