Connect with us


Novak Djokovic’s Legal Options Are Narrow



Novak Djokovic’s legal professionals went to court docket on Saturday morning to problem the Australian immigration minister’s determination to cancel his visa once more, however specialists mentioned that he would discover it way more tough than his first court docket problem.

Throughout a short listening to Saturday, Justice David O’Callaghan of the Federal Court docket of Australia mentioned a full listening to on Djokovic’s enchantment could be held on Sunday at 9:30 a.m. He granted the Djokovic authorized workforce’s request {that a} full panel of judges hear the case relatively than a single choose, which suggests the court docket’s determination on the matter can’t be appealed. A lawyer for the immigration minister had opposed that request.

If Djokovic doesn’t need to merely adjust to the cancellation and depart the nation, he might want to apply for a court docket injunction to cease the Australian authorities from deporting him whereas his legal professionals file a problem, in response to Mary Anne Kenny, an affiliate professor of legislation at Murdoch College.

That might enable him to remain within the nation, however he would almost certainly be held in immigration detention, the place he was saved for 5 days earlier than his first court docket problem and the place he’s being held till the listening to on Sunday.

He may, nonetheless, apply to the federal government for a bridging visa to let him keep out of immigration detention and proceed to play tennis. However in response to Daniel Estrin, an immigration lawyer, Djokovic is unlikely to be granted such a visa as a result of he must abide by the situation that he can’t work. His participation within the Australian Open which begins on Monday, then, would disqualify him.

However as a result of the discretionary powers of the immigration minister, Alex Hawke, are so broad, Estrin and Kenny mentioned Djokovic would discover it considerably harder than his first enchantment.

The minister simply wanted to exhibit that Djokovic may be a threat to the well being, security or good order of the Australian neighborhood, Estrin mentioned. That may be a very low threshold — “anybody may be a threat to the Australian neighborhood if you happen to have a look at it very broadly” — making it extraordinarily tough for Djokovic to argue his case on substance, he added.

As a substitute, Djokovic would want to show that Hawke made an “jurisdictional error,” or utilized the legislation improper, Estrin mentioned — a a lot larger authorized threshold.

Djokovic’s legal professionals won’t be allowed to replead his case or argue that he ought to have been allowed into Australia, Estrin mentioned, that means that, as in his first enchantment, he must succeed on procedural grounds.

“The court docket doesn’t have a look at whether or not the minister made the correct determination,” Estrin mentioned. “The court docket will solely have a look at whether or not the minister dedicated some error of legislation.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2022