Parish Patience Immigration Lawyers

Successful Cases

photodune-12068214-court-gavel-xs.jpg

Below are some of the cases successfully handled by Parish Patience Immigration Lawyers recently.  Our Legal Practice Manager Mr Michael Jones, Accredited Specialist in Immigration Law represented the clients in the Federal Circuit court. Please contact our office to get expert legal advice on the merit of the Tribunal decision for a judicial review application.

  1. Hossain v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1729 (11 July 2016)
  • Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Partner Residence (Class VS) visa – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa –the Tribunal failed to consider compelling reasons at the time of the decision –– jurisdictional error found – application allowed.
  1. SZUDH v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 413 (4 March 2016) 
  • Protection Visa –Administrative Appeals Tribunal – The Tribunal failed to consider whether the Applicant's activities in Australia might become known in India giving rise to a real risk of serious harm to him and failed to consider the claim under the Complementary Protection ground – jurisdictional error found – writs issued.
  1. SZVGP v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 3210 (13 December 2016)
  • Protection Visa – Application to review decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – Tribunal denied the Applicant procedural fairness by not  taking evidence from a witness in a manner that was unreasonable and not based on any logical foundation- The Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error and denied the Applicant procedural fairness by failing to advise him that he was entitled to refuse to answer questions in a manner that might breach legal professional privilege- jurisdictional error found – writs issued.
  1. Maestro & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2016] FCCA 1095 (13 May 2016)
  • MIGRATION – Application for Student (Temporary)(Class TU) visa – review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – whether the Tribunal misunderstood the meaning of “substantial part” in cl.5A407 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – whether the Tribunal misunderstood the meaning of “leading to” in cl.5A407 – jurisdictional error– writs issued.
  1. SZVSK v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2017] FCCA 1169 (2 June 2017)
  • MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal (Tribunal) affirming decision of a delegate of the first respondent not to grant applicant protection visa – whether Tribunal erroneously determined applicant retracted fundamental element of the applicant’s claims – whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error by so finding – jurisdictional error found.

Parish Patience Immigration Lawyers


TOP