Applicant A2 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 576

Applicant A2 of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 576

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay was grossly excessive and not satisfactorily explained, and there was no material to suggest the applicant had a real prospect of success in the substantive application.

Parties
Applicant: Applicant A2 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 (prerogative Relief) / Judgment on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Protection Visa, Refugee Status Determination
Administrative Law Immigration Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Protection Visa Refugee Status Determination

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

Parties

Applicant A2 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 (prerogative Relief) / Judgment on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant should be granted an extension of time to seek prerogative relief in the nature of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
  2. 2 Whether delay was satisfactorily explained
  3. 3 Whether there was any merit in the substantive judicial review grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the delay was grossly excessive and not satisfactorily explained, and there was no material to suggest the applicant had a real prospect of success in the substantive application.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed

Orders

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