ALK15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 629

ALK15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 629

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed appeal was devoid of merit: the only ground advanced below relied on WZAPN as decided by North J, which had been overruled by a Full Court and the High Court; the Federal Circuit Court's refusal of an adjournment disclosed no error or injustice; the applicant had ample time to obtain legal advice and provided no satisfactory explanation for failing to prepare; and no arguable jurisdictional error appeared in the Tribunal's credibility-based rejection of his protection claims.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time From Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Application for Constitutional Writ Relief
Outcome
Application for an extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'adjournment' 'credibility Findings']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Protection' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'adjournment' 'credibility Findings']

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 / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time From Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Application for Constitutional Writ Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether time should be extended to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision refusing constitutional writ relief against the Tribunal's decision affirming refusal of a protection visa." 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court judge erred or caused injustice by refusing an adjournment sought by the applicant to obtain legal representation.' "Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient merit, including any arguable jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision or its credibility findings."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the proposed appeal was devoid of merit: the only ground advanced below relied on WZAPN as decided by North J, which had been overruled by a Full Court and the High Court; the Federal Circuit Court's refusal of an adjournment disclosed no error or injustice; the applicant had ample time to obtain legal advice and provided no satisfactory explanation for failing to prepare; and no arguable jurisdictional error appeared in the Tribunal's credibility-based rejection of his protection claims.

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 costs of the first respondent.']