BAG15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 307

BAG15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 307

The extension of time was refused because the Court detected no possible error in the FCCA judge's reasons of the kind identified in the proposed notice of appeal, there was no reason to think the proposed appeal had any merit, and it would therefore be futile to grant the extension.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to File a Notice of Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court of Australia Judgment Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed; extension of time refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error']

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 File a Notice of Appeal From a Federal Circuit Court of Australia Judgment Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to file a notice of appeal from the Federal Circuit Court judgment' 'Whether the proposed appeal had merit' "Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the full integers of the applicant's complementary protection claims" 'Whether the Tribunal applied the correct test under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the Court detected no possible error in the FCCA judge's reasons of the kind identified in the proposed notice of appeal, there was no reason to think the proposed appeal had any merit, and it would therefore be futile to grant the extension.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; extension of time refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs of the application.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application."]