Skip Navigation



International Journal of Refugee Law Advance Access published online on July 9, 2007
International Journal of Refugee Law, doi:10.1093/ijrl/eem016
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/2/293    most recent
eem016v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gummow, A.
Right arrow Articles by Crennan, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Case Law

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (Appellant) v. Qaah of 2004 & Anor (Respondents) High Court of Australia

ACJ Gummow, Kirby, Callinan, Heydon and JJ Crennan

[2006] HCA 53
15 November 2006
B2/2006

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


   ORDER
 

1. Appeal allowed.
2. Set aside Orders 1 and 2 (except par 3 of Order 2), of the orders made by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia on 27 July 2005 and in their place order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed.
3. Appellant to pay the costs of the first respondent of the application for special leave to appeal and the appeal.

On appeal from the Federal Court of Australia
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

[1] GUMMOW ACJ, CALLINAN, HEYDON AND CRENNAN JJ. The principal question in this appeal is whether an entrant to Australia, who has been granted a temporary protection visa, is, on its expiry, and notwithstanding benign changes in the conditions of the country from which he fled, entitled under Australian law to assert that he continues to be a person to whom Australia owes protection . . . [Full Text of this Article]

The appeal to this Court
The facts and decisional history
The issues
The Australian law issue
The UNHCR assistance issue
The art 1C(5) test issue
The extent of change issue
The ‘burden of proof’ issue
The Tribunal decision issue
Conclusions and order

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?