Tennis superstar Novak Djokovic LOSES his last-ditch appeal to stay in Australia and will be deported within hours - after the federal government feared his presence would 'stoke anti-vaccine sentiment'

• e-mail

Novak Djokovic will be deported from Australia after failing to convince three senior judges of his right to stay in Melbourne to compete in the Australian Open - after the government's lawyers argued he'd become an 'icon' for anti-vaxxers. 

The 20-time Grand Slam champion had his appeal heard in the Federal Court on Sunday in a last ditch attempt to stay and compete for the title.  

But the judges unanimously failed to overturn the government's decision to deport the star, meaning he will likely be put on the first plane back to Dubai, after arriving Down Under on an Emirates flight nearly two weeks ago.

Djokovic, who immediately released a statement saying he was 'extremely disappointed' with the ruling, had been due to play as first seed in the Australian Open on Monday evening, but will now be replaced by world no.150, Salvatore Caruso.

He was spotted at Melbourne Airport just after 8.30pm on Sunday night, having made a swift exit from his immigration detention hotel just hours after the decision.

Djokovic's lawyers had asked the court to review the decision made by immigration minister Alex Hawke to cancel the star's visa for a second time, claiming it was unreasonable and he posed no risk to the Australian community.

The high-powered legal team argued any anti-vax sentiment brought about in the community since the tennis ace arrived in Australia was a result of the government's decision to cancel his visa, while lawyers for the federal government insisted he posed a risk.

Novak Djokovic is will now be deported from Australia after three judges unanimously agreed with the government's cancellation of his visa (pictured today)

The world number one's lawyer Nick Wood presented his case at the Federal Court of Australia to a trio of judges, after Minister Hawke re-cancelled Djokovic's visa on the grounds of 'health and good order'. 

Despite the 34-year-old being unvaccinated, Wood insisted he has not courted anti-vaxxer support and was not associated with the movement.

The government 'doesn't know what Mr Djokovic's current views are', Wood insisted.

Government lawyer Stephen Lloyd said the fact Djokovic was not vaccinated two years into the pandemic and had repeatedly ignored safety measures - including failing to isolate while Covid-19 positive - was evidence enough of his views.

'He's chosen not to go into evidence in this proceeding. He could set the record straight if it needed correcting. He has not - that has important consequences,' the government said in a written submission.

Lloyd also pointed to a series of protests already sparked by Djokovic's arrival in Australia. 

'The Commonwealth should not be bound to suffer the presence of an alien for fear of what might happen if they were removed,' he said. 

Because of the format of the court, the decision made by the panel of three senior judges will be extremely difficult to appeal by either side. 

Djokovic now faces immediate deportation and a three-year ban from Australia - dramatically shortening his odds of winning a championship he has bagged nine times before.

If he had won, it would have set the stage for an audacious title tilt and will deal another humiliating blow to Australia's embattled prime minister ahead of elections expected in May. 

Djokovic sits in the back of car arriving at an immigration detention hotel in Melbourne, Australia, today

His high-powered legal team kicked off arguments in the Federal Court at 9.30am (10.30pm GMT) as Chief Justice James Allsop indicated the hearing could wrap up by midday due to the quality of written submissions filed by both parties. 

Hawke based his decision to cancel the visa on the view that Djokovic's stance on vaccination could pose a threat to public health in the country if he stays in Melbourne and plays in the Australian Open.

Wood said: 'Not a single line of evidence in the material provided any specific or logical foundation whatsoever that the mere presence of Mr Djokovic in Australia in itself may somehow foster anti-vaccination sentiment.

'Is it conceivable that such a consequence might flow from Mr Djokovic's presence in Australia? That's not the point. One is looking for historic, past antecedent or evidence on which reasonable conjecture can be made.' 

The hearing comes hours before the Australian Open is set to begin Monday, where Djokovic had hoped to defend his title and secure an unprecedented 21st Grand Slam triumph. 

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke utilised his far-reaching ministerial powers to cancel Djokovic's visa on Friday afternoon despite a monumental court win against the government earlier in the week. 

Australian authorities on Friday revoked the Serbian tennis superstar's visa for a second time

Djokovic will now be deported from Australia as well as facing a three-year ban from re-entering (pictured, the star practicing in Melbourne on Friday)

On the issue of whether Djokovic's presence would stoke anti-vaccination sentiment, Stephen Lloyd, representing the minister, made reference to such groups 'treating the applicant as a hero'.

Lloyd said: 'He's a high profile person who is in many respects a role model for many people. His presence in Australia would present more strongly to Australians his anti-vaccination views.

'People use high-level athletes to promote ideas and causes all the time. His connection to a cause, whether he wants it or not, is still present.'

Lloyd then spent a considerable amount of time countering the argument of Wood that Hawke had not considered the prospect that deportation could also stoke anti-vaccination sentiment and risk public order.

'The minister was aware his decision to cancel would result in some level of further unrest but the minister was principally concerned that Mr Djokovic's presence would encourage people to emulate his position and that would put the health of Australians at risk,' said Lloyd.  

Djokovic's high-powered legal team, led in court by Nicholas Wood SC, argued there is no legal basis for the Minister to determine if Djokovic has a 'well-known stance on vaccination'.

Some 85,000 people tuned in to a Federal Court stream at 9.30am to watch the legal showdown kick off.

Djokovic's lawyers argued Mr Hawke's ruling was made based on comments the 20-time Grand Slam winner made in 2020 and that there was no attempt by the government to seek his current views on Covid vaccinations.

They also stated the government has 'cited no evidence' that Djokovic will rile up the anti-vaxxer community, and will claim expelling him from the country will do more to fuel anti-jab sentiment Down Under.

'We contend the Minister did not consider the obvious alternative scenario … the possibility that [Mr Djokovic's] visa might be cancelled, [he is] expelled from the country and impaired in his career generally… it's quite obvious that in itself may generate anti-vax sentiment,' Mr Wood told the court.

In court documents filed late on Saturday and made public on Sunday, the Minister argues his decision to cancel Djokovic's visa had little to do with concern about him infecting others with Covid.

Instead, he argued Djokovic's conduct and 'position on vaccination... may encourage others to emulate him by reason of his high profile and status'.

'If others were encouraged to take up or maintain resistance to vaccination or to COVID-19 restrictions, then that would present a problem for the health of individuals and the operation of Australia's hospital system,' court documents state.

The Minister also reasoned Djokovic's presence could lead to rallies and protests - whether they be against the star or in support of him - which could become super spreading events and lead to significantly higher rates of community transmission.

The government's legal team states the above reasons fall 'comfortably' within the Minister's jurisdiction to exercise his power to cancel a visa.

The onus is on Djokovic's legal team to prove the decision was not rational, logical or legal. They cannot simply argue that the 'better' decision would be to allow him to stay.

The Minister is, legally, within his rights to cancel the visa if he is satisfied there is a risk to certain members of the public simply due to Djokovic's presence in Australia. He does not need to ascertain the likely or possible conduct of the visa holder. 

The court's format - a panel of three justices - leaves little room to appeal any decision

Lawyers for Novak Djokovic (pictured) lost their last-ditch bid for the world No. 1 to stay in Australia, despite hitting the Immigration Minister with a new argument when the blockbuster case goes before the Federal Court on Sunday

But Djokovic's lawyers also argued that comments Djokovic made about vaccines in 2020 which have been used to justify the Minister's decision are not necessarily relevant.

They say Djokovic clarified he was 'not an expert' and would do what was best for his body, after indicating he wouldn't want to be 'forced' to take a Covid vaccine well before a jab to protect against the virus had even been developed.

The Minister, the court heard, never asked Djokovic to confirm his present stance on vaccination.

Mr Wood argued the only evidence tying Djokovic to anti-vax activists came about after the initial decision to cancel his visa and when he was detained in the immigration hotel.

While Mr Wood acknowledged fans in Australia have supported Djokovic, he said the high profile visa debate galvanised anti-vax sentiment and spawned further outrage despite Djokovic never expressing an extreme position for or against the jab.

'The only evidence the minister claimed to rely on simply doesn't exist,' Mr Wood argued. 'The only evidence before the minister concerning any relationship or causal connection between Mr Djokovic and what we might call anti-vax groups is an article.'

The article in question was a BBC article which 'reported the first visa decision had galvanised anti-vax groups'. 

The key reasons behind Novak Djokovic's (pictured with wife Jelena) visa cancellation have been revealed with Immigration Minister Alex Hawke saying his presence in Australia may 'foster anti-vaccination sentiment'

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke (pictured) made the call to give unvaccinated Djokovic the boot from Australia 

'If he hadn't have been cancelled, those people who were galvanised by coercive state action... there's no logical connection that those same people would turn up and chant just because he plays tennis.'

Chief Justice Allsop posed the question Djokovic could be seen as 'an iconic sports star that is setting an example that is not wished to be followed'.

'If Mr Djokovic won the Open, as he has in the past, there is an example embedded in the Minister's reasoning that this is an example for young and not so young fans of tennis.'  

The reigning Australian Open champion spent Saturday being grilled by Border Force officers at a secret location before being hauled away under guard while a brief court hearing got underway. 

The tennis ace originally had his visa cancelled upon his arrival at Melbourne Airport on January 5 for inconsistencies in his declaration form granting him an exception for not being vaccinated against Covid.

He was then detained before successfully winning an appeal, only to have the Immigration Minister use his discretionary powers to cancel the visa once more.

Novak Djokovic's last ditch bid to have the decision to cancel his visa overturned was heard on Sunday

The tennis ace (pictured with wife Jelena) originally had his visa cancelled upon his arrival at Melbourne Airport on January 5 for inconsistencies in his declaration form granting him an exception for not being vaccinated against Covid