Applicant A174 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 751

Applicant A174 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 751

There was no satisfactory explanation for the delay in instituting proceedings, and the applicant was not denied an opportunity to be heard as reasonable opportunities were provided, which were not taken. Therefore, there are no prospects of success in the proposed challenge and the extension of time should be refused.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant A174 of 2002; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Member Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application for extension of time refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Natural Justice, Jurisdictional Error
Administrative Law Immigration Law Extension of Time Natural Justice Jurisdictional Error

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant A174 of 2002

Applicant

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Member Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay in instituting proceedings was adequately explained
  2. 2 Whether there was a realistic prospect of success on the basis of alleged denial of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

There was no satisfactory explanation for the delay in instituting proceedings, and the applicant was not denied an opportunity to be heard as reasonable opportunities were provided, which were not taken. Therefore, there are no prospects of success in the proposed challenge and the extension of time should be refused.

Court Disposition

application for extension of time refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for an extension of time is refused.
  • Application is dismissed.