BJM15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2021] FCA 786

BJM15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2021] FCA 786

The application for extension of time was refused due to an inadequate explanation for the three-year delay, lack of demonstrated merit in the proposed grounds of appeal (which are either not reasonably arguable or were not advanced before the primary judge), and the case lacking the exceptional character required for such relief. Consequently, the injunctive relief was also dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal and Application for Urgent Injunction / Judgment on Extension of Time and Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; application for injunctive relief dismissed; costs awarded to Minister.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'injunctive Relief' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'refugee Protection' 'judicial Review' 'finality in Litigation']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'human Rights Law'] ['extension of Time' 'injunctive Relief' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'refugee Protection' 'judicial Review' 'finality in Litigation']

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 Appeal and Application for Urgent Injunction / Judgment on Extension of Time and Injunctive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time to appeal should be granted despite a three-year delay' 'Whether the applicant has demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success for appeal' "Whether procedural fairness was denied in the Tribunal's treatment of photographic evidence" 'Whether injunctive relief restraining removal to Sri Lanka is warranted']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused due to an inadequate explanation for the three-year delay, lack of demonstrated merit in the proposed grounds of appeal (which are either not reasonably arguable or were not advanced before the primary judge), and the case lacking the exceptional character required for such relief. Consequently, the injunctive relief was also dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed; application for injunctive relief dismissed; costs awarded to Minister.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time in which to appeal is dismissed.' 'The application for injunctive relief is dismissed.' "The applicant do pay the first respondent's costs of the proceedings to be assessed if not agreed."]