SZVLE v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 90

SZVLE v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 90

Neither complaint—the alleged failure to consider relevant law and the alleged error in not granting adjournment for legal representation—was made out. The application for judicial review under s 39B must be dismissed because no jurisdictional error was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment (application for Relief Under S 39 B of Judiciary Act 1903)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'jurisdictional Error']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['protection Visas' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time' '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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment (application for Relief Under S 39 B of Judiciary Act 1903)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary judge failed to properly consider relevant law' 'Whether the primary judge erred by failing to grant adjournment to enable applicants to obtain legal representation']

Ratio Decidendi

Neither complaint—the alleged failure to consider relevant law and the alleged error in not granting adjournment for legal representation—was made out. The application for judicial review under s 39B must be dismissed because no jurisdictional error was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The first and second applicants pay the first respondent's costs."]