BFH17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 95

BFH17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 95

The Tribunal properly considered the DFAT Report and the applicant's personal circumstances, including his claimed roles as teacher and religious leader, and was entitled to find that the applicant did not have a high profile outside his local Shia community; thus, the Tribunal did not err or fail to exercise jurisdiction, and there was no illogicality or irrationality made out. Leave to rely on new grounds was refused, and as those were the only grounds pressed, the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: BFH17; Applicant: BFI17; Applicant: BFJ17; Applicant: BFK17; Respondent: Minister for Home Affairs; Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal and Leave to Raise New Grounds; Final Orders on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; extension of time granted; leave to rely on new ground refused; costs ordered against applicants.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Appeal, Leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal, Admission of New Evidence on Appeal, Protection Visas, Tribunal Review, Jurisdictional Error
Administrative Law Immigration Law Human Rights Extension of Time for Appeal Leave to Raise New Grounds on Appeal Admission of New Evidence on Appeal Protection Visas Tribunal Review +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BFH17

Applicant

BFI17

Applicant

BFJ17

Applicant

BFK17

Applicant

Minister for Home Affairs

Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal and Leave to Raise New Grounds; Final Orders on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time for filing the appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to rely upon a new ground of appeal and new evidence not before the primary judge
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the applicant's risk as a high-profile Shia teacher or religious leader

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal properly considered the DFAT Report and the applicant's personal circumstances, including his claimed roles as teacher and religious leader, and was entitled to find that the applicant did not have a high profile outside his local Shia community; thus, the Tribunal did not err or fail to exercise jurisdiction, and there was no illogicality or irrationality made out. Leave to rely on new grounds was refused, and as those were the only grounds pressed, the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; extension of time granted; leave to rely on new ground refused; costs ordered against applicants.

Orders

  • Pursuant to r 36.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the time for filing of the appeal be extended to 27 May 2019.
  • The application for leave to rely upon the second ground identified in the notice of appeal lodged on 24 May 2019 is dismissed.