BZA16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) [2019] FCA 60

BZA16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) [2019] FCA 60

The application for an extension of time was refused because the grounds of appeal were vague, unparticularised, and did not disclose any error of law or jurisdictional error; the delay was not excused by the applicant’s circumstances; and there were no merits to the substantive appeal.

Parties
Applicant: BZA16; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time (and Leave) to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Protection Visa, Refugee Status, Jurisdictional Error
Administrative Law Immigration Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Protection Visa Refugee Status Jurisdictional Error

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BZA16

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time (and Leave) to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file a notice of appeal against a Federal Circuit Court judgment dismissing an application for judicial review of a protection visa refusal
  2. 2 Whether the grounds of appeal disclose error and have merit

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the grounds of appeal were vague, unparticularised, and did not disclose any error of law or jurisdictional error; the delay was not excused by the applicant’s circumstances; and there were no merits to the substantive appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The stay of Order 1 made on 14 December 2018, pursuant to Order 2 made on 14 December 2018, be lifted, with the effect that the application for an extension of time in which to file a notice of appeal be dismissed with costs.