BVS18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 823

BVS18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 823

Leave to appeal and an extension of time were refused because the applicant did not adequately explain filing 91 days late and the proposed grounds had very low prospects of success. The proposed jurisdictional error ground lacked particulars and the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings did not disclose legal unreasonableness or any other jurisdictional error. The complaints about incorrect information and bias amounted to impermissible merits review or were unsupported, and the new matters raised orally did not bear on the correctness of the Tribunal or Federal Circuit Court decisions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the first respondent.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Appeal' 'merits Review' 'apprehended Bias' 'credibility Findings']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Appeal' 'merits Review' 'apprehended Bias' 'credibility Findings']

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 and Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time under FCR 35.14 to seek leave to appeal 91 days out of time' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the interlocutory decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia' 'Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of establishing jurisdictional error by the Tribunal' 'Whether the Tribunal used incorrect information or was biased against the applicant' "Whether the applicant's new matters concerning marriage and conversion of his wife could affect the correctness of the Tribunal and Federal Circuit Court decisions"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal and an extension of time were refused because the applicant did not adequately explain filing 91 days late and the proposed grounds had very low prospects of success. The proposed jurisdictional error ground lacked particulars and the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings did not disclose legal unreasonableness or any other jurisdictional error. The complaints about incorrect information and bias amounted to impermissible merits review or were unsupported, and the new matters raised orally did not bear on the correctness of the Tribunal or Federal Circuit Court decisions.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs payable by the applicant to the first respondent.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the first respondent's costs."]