Applicant A184 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 408

Applicant A184 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 408

The application for an extension of time to initiate proceedings failed because the applicant did not demonstrate any arguable jurisdictional error, did not provide a satisfactory explanation for delay, and had already pursued available judicial review avenues; consequently, the substantive application was dismissed as out of time.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant A184 of 2003; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs; Second Respondent: Member, Refugee Review Tribunal; Third Respondent: The Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Extension of Time Application and Dismissal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdictional Error, Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Procedure, Costs
Administrative Law Migration Law Jurisdictional Error Extension of Time Judicial Review Procedure Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant A184 of 2003

Applicant

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

First Respondent

Member, Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

The Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Extension of Time Application and Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the extension of time to apply for prerogative relief should be granted
  2. 2 Whether there was any arguable jurisdictional error by the Refugee Review Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time to initiate proceedings failed because the applicant did not demonstrate any arguable jurisdictional error, did not provide a satisfactory explanation for delay, and had already pursued available judicial review avenues; consequently, the substantive application was dismissed as out of time.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Applicant to pay to the first respondent costs of the application.