CMW15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 207

CMW15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 207

The extension of time was refused because the explanation for the 15 day delay was not satisfactory and the proposed appeal had insufficient prospects of success. The Court held that, having read the Tribunal hearing transcript with the Tribunal's reasons, it was plain beyond reasonable argument that the Tribunal had in mind and accepted the evidence of the first applicant's political activities in Australia, including his protest conduct, when it characterised that activity as low level, assessed it against the country information, and was not satisfied that it created a real chance of serious harm if he returned to Fiji.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Application to Extend Time Within Which to Bring an Appeal From a Judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; applicants to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'failure to Deal With an Integer of a Claim' 'political Opinion Persecution']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'failure to Deal With an Integer of a Claim' 'political Opinion Persecution']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal / Application to Extend Time Within Which to Bring an Appeal From a Judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an adequate reason was provided for the 15 day delay in filing the application to extend time to appeal.' "Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient merit, including whether the Tribunal failed to deal with an integer of the first applicant's claim that he publicly condemned and embarrassed Prime Minister Bainimarama at a Sydney demonstration and would be persecuted if returned to Fiji."]

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the explanation for the 15 day delay was not satisfactory and the proposed appeal had insufficient prospects of success. The Court held that, having read the Tribunal hearing transcript with the Tribunal's reasons, it was plain beyond reasonable argument that the Tribunal had in mind and accepted the evidence of the first applicant's political activities in Australia, including his protest conduct, when it characterised that activity as low level, assessed it against the country information, and was not satisfied that it created a real chance of serious harm if he returned to Fiji.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time dated 22 August 2017 be dismissed.' "The applicants pay the first respondent's costs."]