Lal v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 661

Lal v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 661

The applicants required leave to appeal and had filed their application outside the applicable 14 day period, requiring an extension of time. They had proper notice of the adjourned hearing, did not attend, did not communicate with the Court or explain their absence, and had not filed required submissions. In those circumstances, dismissal of the application under r 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision of the Federal Circuit Court / Hearing of Application; Applicants Did Not Appear; Application Dismissed Under R 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs fixed in the sum of $1,756.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'non Attendance by Applicants' 'dismissal of Application']
['practice and Procedure' 'migration'] ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'non Attendance by Applicants' 'dismissal of Application']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision of the Federal Circuit Court / Hearing of Application; Applicants Did Not Appear; Application Dismissed Under R 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal was required from the Federal Circuit Court decision.' 'Whether an extension of time was required because the application was filed outside the 14 day limitation period.' 'Whether the application should be dismissed under r 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) because the applicants did not attend the hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants required leave to appeal and had filed their application outside the applicable 14 day period, requiring an extension of time. They had proper notice of the adjourned hearing, did not attend, did not communicate with the Court or explain their absence, and had not filed required submissions. In those circumstances, dismissal of the application under r 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs fixed in the sum of $1,756.

Orders

  • ['The application filed on 4 March 2014 for leave to appeal against the interlocutory decision of the Federal Circuit Court of 11 February 2014, and for an extension of time in which to do so, is dismissed.' "The applicants are to pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the application, fixed in the...