AJX15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 109

AJX15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 109

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed sole ground of appeal had no real prospect of success in light of the Tribunal's reasons, which referred to and applied the relevant PAM3 guidance and statutory concepts of cruel or inhuman treatment and degrading treatment or punishment, and because the applicant failed to explain a significant delay after learning in late August 2015 that his request for Ministerial intervention under s 417 had been declined.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time in Which to File a Notice of Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing Review of a Migration Tribunal Decision Concerning a Protection Visa / Extension of Time Application
Outcome
Application for an extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'ministerial Direction No 56' 'pam3 Protection Visas – Complementary Protection Guidelines' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'sri Lankan Tamil Applicant' 'illegal Departure From Sri Lanka' 'significant Harm']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'human Rights'] ['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'ministerial Direction No 56' 'pam3 Protection Visas – Complementary Protection Guidelines' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'sri Lankan Tamil Applicant' 'illegal Departure From Sri Lanka' 'significant Harm']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for an Extension of Time in Which to File a Notice of Appeal From a Decision of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing Review of a Migration Tribunal Decision Concerning a Protection Visa / Extension of Time Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended to allow the applicant to file a notice of appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision given on 3 July 2015.' 'Whether the proposed appeal ground that the Tribunal failed properly to consider and apply the PAM3 Protection Visas – Complementary Protection Guidelines had sufficient merit.' "Whether the applicant's delay in seeking to appeal was adequately explained."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed sole ground of appeal had no real prospect of success in light of the Tribunal's reasons, which referred to and applied the relevant PAM3 guidance and statutory concepts of cruel or inhuman treatment and degrading treatment or punishment, and because the applicant failed to explain a significant delay after learning in late August 2015 that his request for Ministerial intervention under s 417 had been declined.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

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