Applicants A64/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 568

Applicants A64/2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 568

The extension of time was refused because there was no prospect of success on the application, as the applicant's claims had already been rejected on adverse credit grounds by the Tribunal, and subsequent legal challenges had failed. There was no credible new ground or evidence to attack the Tribunal's decision.

Parties
Applicant: Applicants A64/2002; 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 for Prerogative Relief / Final Determination of Notice of Motion Seeking Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Prerogative Relief, High Court Remittal, Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment
Administrative Law Immigration Law Extension of Time Prerogative Relief High Court Remittal Refugee Status Credibility Assessment

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

Parties

Applicants A64/2002

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 for Prerogative Relief / Final Determination of Notice of Motion Seeking Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to seek prerogative relief related to the refusal of protection visas by the Refugee Review Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because there was no prospect of success on the application, as the applicant's claims had already been rejected on adverse credit grounds by the Tribunal, and subsequent legal challenges had failed. There was no credible new ground or evidence to attack the Tribunal's decision.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed

Orders

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