ASA17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 375

ASA17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 375

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the draft notice of appeal was unparticularised, the proposed grounds had no realistic prospect of success after review of the Authority's decision and the trial judge's reasons, and the applicant was in default of appearance and had not substantively engaged with the application since filing it.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Refusing Constitutional Writ Relief Concerning a Protection Visa Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time; Dismissed
Outcome
Application for an extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'immigration Assessment Authority' 'non Appearance']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'immigration Assessment Authority' 'non Appearance']

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 an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Refusing Constitutional Writ Relief Concerning a Protection Visa Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time; Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for the applicant to file a notice of appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision.' 'Whether the proposed grounds of appeal had sufficient merit or realistic prospects of success.' "Whether the applicant's non-appearance and lack of substantive engagement supported dismissal of the application."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because the draft notice of appeal was unparticularised, the proposed grounds had no realistic prospect of success after review of the Authority's decision and the trial judge's reasons, and the applicant was in default of appearance and had not substantively engaged with the application since filing it.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time be dismissed.' 'The name of the first respondent be amended to Minister for Home Affairs.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1,756."]