BGS15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1306

BGS15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1306

Although the applicant was only 11 days late, the proposed appeal had no prospect of success because neither the proposed ground of appeal nor the statutory declaration identified any arguable jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision or in the primary judge's reasons. The primary judge was therefore right to dismiss the judicial review application, and the application for an extension of time and leave to appeal was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From a Federal Circuit Court Judgment Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
The application for an extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'tamil Asylum Seeker From Sri Lanka' 'complementary Protection']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['protection Visa' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'tamil Asylum Seeker From Sri Lanka' 'complementary Protection']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From a Federal Circuit Court Judgment Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to grant an extension of time for filing the application for leave to appeal.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court's dismissal of the judicial review application." "Whether the applicant identified an arguable jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision or in the reasons of the primary judge."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant was only 11 days late, the proposed appeal had no prospect of success because neither the proposed ground of appeal nor the statutory declaration identified any arguable jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision or in the primary judge's reasons. The primary judge was therefore right to dismiss the judicial review application, and the application for an extension of time and leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

The application for an extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time and leave to appeal be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application fixed in the amount of $3,000."]