BKV15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1030

BKV15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1030

The proposed appeal was bound to fail because the adjournment requests, particularly the request made 24 hours before the hearing, lacked particularised detail about any disadvantage to the applicant if the hearing proceeded; the Tribunal preserved practical procedural fairness by allowing time for post-hearing submissions and permitting the applicant and solicitor to confer during the hearing. The refusals to adjourn did not lack an intelligible justification and did not deprive the applicant of the opportunity to give evidence or present arguments under s 425, so the extension of time was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time Within Which to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application for an extension of time within which to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'refusal to Adjourn Tribunal Hearing' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 425']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'refusal to Adjourn Tribunal Hearing' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'migration Act 1958 (cth) S 425']

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 Within Which to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to appeal.' "Whether the Tribunal's refusal to adjourn the hearing constituted a failure to provide a fair hearing as required by s 425 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)." "Whether the Tribunal's refusal to adjourn the hearing was an unreasonable exercise of discretion." 'Whether the applicant should have leave to rely on grounds not advanced in the Federal Circuit Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed appeal was bound to fail because the adjournment requests, particularly the request made 24 hours before the hearing, lacked particularised detail about any disadvantage to the applicant if the hearing proceeded; the Tribunal preserved practical procedural fairness by allowing time for post-hearing submissions and permitting the applicant and solicitor to confer during the hearing. The refusals to adjourn did not lack an intelligible justification and did not deprive the applicant of the opportunity to give evidence or present arguments under s 425, so the extension of time was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time within which to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time within which to appeal is refused.' "The applicant is to pay the first respondent's costs of the application, as agreed or taxed."]