AOD17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1853

AOD17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1853

The application for extension of time is refused because the application for leave to appeal is hopeless. The applicant failed to provide an adequate explanation for non-appearance, had an alternative remedy available, and the grounds of appeal do not disclose error. Even if time was extended, there is no merit in the underlying application for judicial review.

Parties
Applicant: AOD17; First Respondent: Minister for Home Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal / Application for Extension of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal; Final Determination
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused with costs.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Judicial Review, Dismissal for Non Appearance
Migration Administrative Law Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Judicial Review Dismissal for Non Appearance

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AOD17

Applicant

Minister for Home Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal / Application for Extension of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal; Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to seek leave to appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether there was jurisdictional error in the Federal Circuit Court's dismissal for non-appearance
  3. 3 Whether the grounds of appeal or judicial review had merit

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time is refused because the application for leave to appeal is hopeless. The applicant failed to provide an adequate explanation for non-appearance, had an alternative remedy available, and the grounds of appeal do not disclose error. Even if time was extended, there is no merit in the underlying application for judicial review.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's application for an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal be refused.
  • The applicant pay the first respondent's costs to be taxed in default of agreement.