Novak Djokovic's entry to Australia rejected, tennis star to be flown out later today

Forums › Sports › Novak Djokovic's entry to Australia rejected, tennis star to be flown out later today

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 23

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851185 15-Jan-2022 17:33

cshwone:
If the Minister has broad discretionary powers under an Act to revoke a visa, does the court actually have any authority in this? Would appreciate if someone who understands could explain.

The court have authority to determine if the law has been followed. Djokovic is likely applying for a judicial review of the decision by the minister.

Broadly speaking judicial review can only overturn if there’s an act ultra vires or if the decision is so unreasonable that a reasonable person wouldn’t have made it.

PolicyGuy

1821 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1772

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2851193 15-Jan-2022 18:05

Back to the Immigration Detention hotel

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-15/novak-djokovic-live-updates-visa-cancellation-court-hearing/100758558

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851207 15-Jan-2022 19:57

from above page

Djokovic's lawyers update their application, adding more arguments

While we wait for confirmation on where Djokovic may be headed, his lawyers have filed an amended application, adding another ground for dismissal.

Their earlier application argued the Immigration Minister didn't take a logical or reasonable approach to the application and did not have evidence to support his claim Mr Djokovic would "foster anti-vaccination sentiment" by being allowed to stay in Australia.

Now they are flagging they will also argue it was not open to the Minister to make findings Djokovic had a "well-known stance on vaccination".

It's one more peg they will hang their case on when it returns to court tomorrow morning.

epr

267 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132

Lifetime subscriber

#2851213 15-Jan-2022 20:29

I think the following is important from the Stuff article. Would he want to return anyway is the question. Also after all the kerfuffle he probably wouldn't get much in the way of compassion for compassionate grounds.

If Djokovic doesn’t successfully appeal the decision, the laws dictate he would be banned from being granted another visa for three years – however this can be waived on “compassionate grounds” if he applies for another visa.

Here is my Quic referral https://account.quic.nz/refer/39513 if you are keen to change ISP and to get free setup (save $29). I will get a $50 credit if you use this. Thank you very much if you use my link but I'm sure there are quite a few others who could share the same on here, no hard feelings if you use a different link.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#2851219 15-Jan-2022 21:45

Batman:

from above page

Djokovic's lawyers update their application, adding more arguments

While we wait for confirmation on where Djokovic may be headed, his lawyers have filed an amended application, adding another ground for dismissal.

Their earlier application argued the Immigration Minister didn't take a logical or reasonable approach to the application and did not have evidence to support his claim Mr Djokovic would "foster anti-vaccination sentiment" by being allowed to stay in Australia.

Now they are flagging they will also argue it was not open to the Minister to make findings Djokovic had a "well-known stance on vaccination".

It's one more peg they will hang their case on when it returns to court tomorrow morning.

The Minister in his original findings had more than sufficient evidence of Djokovic's vaccination stance. Remember, the whole thing was set off when Djokovic announced on Instagram (or Twitter?) that he has headed to the Australian Open with an exemption. He just had to wedge in that political statement that he refuses to vaccinate, and ironically it was this insistence that he make it 100% clear that he will not be vaccinated that triggered the attention to his declaration in the first place. If he'd just shut up in the first place, it would have gone unnoticed.

As to the anti-vaccination sentiment, today's protests did nothing more than to prove the Minister's point, rather effectively.

Again, it also ignores that the Minister doesn't have to prove his grounds exist, only that he's satisfied they exist. Djokovic is screwed.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851279 15-Jan-2022 22:39

listening to his lawyer's submission to the family court, very convincing.

i think Djokovic has a chance to convince the federal court.

we will know tomorrow

PS the opposing (ie govt lawyers) lawyers call djokovic lawyer "my friend". and he agrees with everything requested by djokovic lawyer

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851286 15-Jan-2022 22:56

Batman:
listening to his lawyer's submission to the family court, very convincing.

i think Djokovic has a chance to convince the federal court.

we will know tomorrow

PS the opposing (ie govt lawyers) lawyers call djokovic lawyer "my friend". and he agrees with everything requested by djokovic lawyer

Do try and learn something about court before commenting. This is how all solicitors address each other.

He did not agree to everything, Djokovic is in detention and the government opposed a 3 Judge bench.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#2851294 15-Jan-2022 23:57

Batman:

listening to his lawyer's submission to the family court, very convincing.

i think Djokovic has a chance to convince the federal court.

we will know tomorrow

PS the opposing (ie govt lawyers) lawyers call djokovic lawyer "my friend". and he agrees with everything requested by djokovic lawyer

What are you on about? At no point have they appeared before the family court, they've appeared before the Federal Circuit and will now appear before either a Federal Court Justice or a full bench of the Federal Court.

Even those arguments before the Federal Circuit were not convincing, they were incoherent. Once again, the Minister doesn't need to prove what grounds were used to cancel a visa under personal discretionary powers, the Minister only needs to prove they're satisfied that grounds exist. This is why a lot of people criticised the granting of those powers to the Minister in the first place.

The form of address you refer to is supposedly a custom intended to ensure the while the court process remains adversarial, it does not become aggressive and combative. It does not indicate that the two sides agree on anything.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851301 16-Jan-2022 04:26

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851309 16-Jan-2022 07:56

Batman:

It’s a YouTube link. Great.

Your time would have been better off figuring out the difference between division 1 and division 2.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851315 16-Jan-2022 08:12

we will know by the end of today if he's a free man or not

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#2851327 16-Jan-2022 09:03

Handle9:

It’s a YouTube link. Great.

Your time would have been better off figuring out the difference between division 1 and division 2.

Your sense of superiority gets a little grating at times. Can't you make a point without all the ego?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

CruciasNZ

887 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 134

Trusted

#2851332 16-Jan-2022 09:20

I doubt he'll manage to convince the judges that he is of sufficiently good character. The steady trickle of lying and exposure events put bed to that argument. He lied about changing country, he lied about his exposure to COVID, he did photo shoots and interviews while positive and didn't inform those he was meeting. Then you can add on top of that the anti-vaccine stance and grand-standing he's done.

So yeah I'll be very surprised if they let him remain.

Professional Forum Lurker

Bung

6734 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2928

Subscriber

#2851339 16-Jan-2022 09:49

Kyanar:
The form of address you refer to is supposedly a custom intended to ensure the while the court process remains adversarial, it does not become aggressive and combative. It does not indicate that the two sides agree on anything.

"My learned friend" laid on thick enough can be used to indicate that the opposing barrister doesn't know what he's talking about.

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2851400 16-Jan-2022 13:00

Live stream of today’s hearing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRxyGJGi6OE

Arcane, boring and difficult to listen to.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 23