Applicant A16 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 567

Applicant A16 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 567

The application was brought approximately 18 months after the Tribunal's decision, which is a very long delay without adequate justification. The applicant effectively abandoned the claim by pursuing alternative visa options and did not provide material impinging on the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings. The case lacked merit, and no sufficient reason was established to justify exercising discretion to extend time for the application.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant A16 of 2002; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Member Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time (constitutional Writs) / Interlocutory (extension of Time) Dismissed
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Prerogative Writs, Judicial Review, Natural Justice
Immigration Law Administrative Law Extension of Time Prerogative Writs Judicial Review Natural Justice

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant A16 of 2002

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Member Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time (constitutional Writs) / Interlocutory (extension of Time) Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time should be granted to apply for relief in the nature of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition against a Refugee Review Tribunal decision
  2. 2 Whether there are sufficient merits to support an extension of time in relation to the Tribunal's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The application was brought approximately 18 months after the Tribunal's decision, which is a very long delay without adequate justification. The applicant effectively abandoned the claim by pursuing alternative visa options and did not provide material impinging on the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings. The case lacked merit, and no sufficient reason was established to justify exercising discretion to extend time for the application.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion seeking an extension of time be dismissed.
  • The applicant to pay the respondent's costs, fixed at $1,250 including disbursements.