Oh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 749

Oh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 749

The extension of time was refused because the 14 month delay was not explained: the applicants had made a calculated and informed decision to pursue ministerial intervention under s 351 rather than the present application. The proposed proceeding also lacked merit because the material did not support any arguable denial of procedural fairness; the Tribunal correspondence indicated that the applicants did not wish a hearing and expected the Tribunal to dismiss the review.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking an Extension of Time Within Which to Apply for Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Certiorari to Quash a Decision of the Migration Review Tribunal and for Other Relief / Application for Extension of Time After the Matter Was Remitted to the Federal Court
Outcome
Application by notice of motion for an extension of time refused and application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'certiorari' 'migration Review Tribunal' 'special Eligibility (residence) (class Ao) Visa, Subclass 806' 'ministerial Intervention Under S 351' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'certiorari' 'migration Review Tribunal' 'special Eligibility (residence) (class Ao) Visa, Subclass 806' 'ministerial Intervention Under S 351' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Seeking an Extension of Time Within Which to Apply for Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Certiorari to Quash a Decision of the Migration Review Tribunal and for Other Relief / Application for Extension of Time After the Matter Was Remitted to the Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended to permit the applicants to seek relief quashing the Migration Review Tribunal decision made on 1 August 2001.' 'Whether the applicants had an adequate explanation for the delay in commencing the High Court proceeding on 17 October 2002.' 'Whether the proposed application had sufficient merit, including whether there was an arguable jurisdictional error based on an alleged failure to accord the applicants a hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the 14 month delay was not explained: the applicants had made a calculated and informed decision to pursue ministerial intervention under s 351 rather than the present application. The proposed proceeding also lacked merit because the material did not support any arguable denial of procedural fairness; the Tribunal correspondence indicated that the applicants did not wish a hearing and expected the Tribunal to dismiss the review.

Court Disposition

Application by notice of motion for an extension of time refused and application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application by notice of motion for an extension of time is refused.' 'Application is dismissed.' 'Applicant to pay costs of the first respondent fixed at $1250, including disbursements.' 'No order for costs of the second and third respondents.']