ADN18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 692

ADN18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 692

The extension of time was refused because, although the delay was short and the Minister did not rely on prejudice, the proposed appeal had no realistic prospect of success. The trial judge had considered the merits of the proposed judicial review grounds and found them lacking, the question whether merits were a mandatory relevant consideration could not affect the result, the first ground was answered by Craig, and no arguable error was shown in the primary judge's reasoning about new information under Pt 7AA.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal in a Migration Judicial Review Matter / Federal Court Application for a Two Day Extension of Time to Appeal From ADN18 V Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1677
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'fast Track Reviewable Decisions' 'new Information Before the Immigration Assessment Authority' 'protection Visa Refusal' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa Refusal']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'judicial Review'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'fast Track Reviewable Decisions' 'new Information Before the Immigration Assessment Authority' 'protection Visa Refusal' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa Refusal']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal in a Migration Judicial Review Matter / Federal Court Application for a Two Day Extension of Time to Appeal From ADN18 V Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1677

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should be granted a two-day extension of time to appeal from the primary judge's decision." 'Whether the proposed appeal had arguable or realistic prospects of success.' 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court judge acted within jurisdiction in refusing an extension of time under s 477 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether the merits of the proposed judicial review application were a mandatory relevant consideration and whether they were considered.' 'Whether claims or inferences about money lending, wealth, blackmail, extortion and Facebook activity were new information within Pt 7AA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because, although the delay was short and the Minister did not rely on prejudice, the proposed appeal had no realistic prospect of success. The trial judge had considered the merits of the proposed judicial review grounds and found them lacking, the question whether merits were a mandatory relevant consideration could not affect the result, the first ground was answered by Craig, and no arguable error was shown in the primary judge's reasoning about new information under Pt 7AA.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs."]