AAM16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 121

AAM16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 121

Although the applicant gave a reasonable explanation for the delay, the proposed appeal had no sufficient, and in the Court's view no, prospect of success. The Tribunal correctly understood the real chance test, considered the deteriorating security situation and country information, and reached conclusions about risk to the applicant in Kabul that were reasonably open. The interests of justice therefore did not warrant an extension of time.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time Within Which to Appeal From Dismissal of Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Application
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'real Chance Test' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'complementary Protection']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'real Chance Test' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'complementary Protection']

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 and Leave to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time Within Which to Appeal From Dismissal of Federal Circuit Court Judicial Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted despite a delay in the order of 315 days.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of success.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the applicant's claimed fear arising from the worsening security situation in Afghanistan." 'Whether the Tribunal misinterpreted or misapplied the real chance test in Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.' "Whether the Tribunal's conclusions about risk to the applicant as a Hazara Shia Muslim returnee to Afghanistan were reasonably open."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant gave a reasonable explanation for the delay, the proposed appeal had no sufficient, and in the Court's view no, prospect of success. The Tribunal correctly understood the real chance test, considered the deteriorating security situation and country information, and reached conclusions about risk to the applicant in Kabul that were reasonably open. The interests of justice therefore did not warrant an extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time be dismissed.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the first respondent of $1,753.00.']