AQG17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1857

AQG17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1857

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to file submissions and failed to appear, suggesting they did not wish to proceed, and because the proposed grounds of appeal were hopeless. The alleged wrong application of law lacked meaningful particulars and appeared to seek impermissible merits review; the Tribunal had considered the first applicant's claims and there was no indication that irrelevant information was taken into account. No credible procedural fairness complaint concerning the proceeding before the primary judge, or other error by the primary judge, was identified. It was therefore not in the interests of justice to extend time or allow the matter to continue.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for an Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Application Dismissed by the Federal Court After Applicants Failed to Appear and Failed to File Submissions
Outcome
Application for an extension of time dismissed; applicants ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'default of Appearance' 'merits of Proposed Appeal' 'procedural Fairness']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'default of Appearance' 'merits of Proposed Appeal' 'procedural Fairness']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Application for an Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Application Dismissed by the Federal Court After Applicants Failed to Appear and Failed to File Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended under r 36.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to file a notice of appeal one day out of time.' "Whether the applicants' failure to file submissions and failure to appear justified dismissal under r 1.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)." 'Whether the proposed appeal grounds had any merit.' 'Whether the Tribunal or primary judge erred by considering irrelevant information or findings about harm in Malaysia.' 'Whether there was any procedural unfairness before the primary judge.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to file submissions and failed to appear, suggesting they did not wish to proceed, and because the proposed grounds of appeal were hopeless. The alleged wrong application of law lacked meaningful particulars and appeared to seek impermissible merits review; the Tribunal had considered the first applicant's claims and there was no indication that irrelevant information was taken into account. No credible procedural fairness complaint concerning the proceeding before the primary judge, or other error by the primary judge, was identified. It was therefore not in the interests of justice to extend time or allow the matter to continue.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time dismissed; applicants ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicants' application for an extension of time filed on 27 June 2019 is dismissed." "The applicants are to pay the first respondent's costs."]