BAO15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 214

BAO15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 214

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because any appeal would have no reasonable prospects of success. The proposed grounds did not identify arguable error by the Federal Circuit Court or jurisdictional error by the Tribunal: s 91R was irrelevant to the complementary protection application under s 36(2)(aa), factual merits could not be reconsidered by the Court, s 36(2B)(a) relocation did not arise because the Tribunal rejected the claimed real risk of significant harm, and the general allegation about the Tribunal's reasonable satisfaction identified no error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for an Extension of Time Within Which to Seek Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Judicial Review Application at a Show Cause Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'reasonable Prospects of Success']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'complementary Protection' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'reasonable Prospects of Success']

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

Migration Application for an Extension of Time Within Which to Seek Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of Judicial Review Application at a Show Cause Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of success.' 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court erred in dismissing the judicial review application under r 44.12(1)(a) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).' "Whether the Tribunal's decision disclosed jurisdictional error in its consideration of complementary protection under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because any appeal would have no reasonable prospects of success. The proposed grounds did not identify arguable error by the Federal Circuit Court or jurisdictional error by the Tribunal: s 91R was irrelevant to the complementary protection application under s 36(2)(aa), factual merits could not be reconsidered by the Court, s 36(2B)(a) relocation did not arise because the Tribunal rejected the claimed real risk of significant harm, and the general allegation about the Tribunal's reasonable satisfaction identified no error.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal is dismissed.' 'The applicant is to pay the costs of the first respondent as agreed or assessed.']