ARA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 226

ARA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 226

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the draft notice of appeal did not identify any error by the primary judge and, even if construed as challenging the dismissal of the judicial review grounds, the proposed appeal lacked sufficient prospects of success. The Tribunal's adverse credibility findings were reasoned and open to it, the primary judge did not err in rejecting the legal and factual grounds, and the applicant did not establish bias or denial of procedural fairness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Application for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'bias' 'credibility Findings']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'bias' 'credibility Findings']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Appeal From Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing Application for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of success.' 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in rejecting grounds alleging incorrect application of law, failure to consider relevant facts or consideration of irrelevant facts, denial of procedural fairness, or bias.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the draft notice of appeal did not identify any error by the primary judge and, even if construed as challenging the dismissal of the judicial review grounds, the proposed appeal lacked sufficient prospects of success. The Tribunal's adverse credibility findings were reasoned and open to it, the primary judge did not err in rejecting the legal and factual grounds, and the applicant did not establish bias or denial of procedural fairness.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for an extension of time to appeal is dismissed." "The applicant is to pay the first respondent's costs."]