BZABK v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FCA 774

BZABK v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] FCA 774

The appeal is dismissed because, even if competent, it is doomed to fail following refusal of extension of time under s 477(2) Migration Act 1958; Federal Magistrates Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a judicial review application outside 35-day limit after extension is refused, and s 476A(3)(a) bars appeals from such refusal.

Parties
Appellant: BZABK; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Citizenship; Second Respondent: Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Appeal Competency
Migration Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Appeal Competency

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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BZABK

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

First Respondent

Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appeal from an order refusing extension of time under s 477(2) Migration Act 1958 is competent
  2. 2 Whether appeal from order dismissing judicial review application is doomed to fail after extension of time refused
  3. 3 Whether there is any valid judicial review application extant after refusal of extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because, even if competent, it is doomed to fail following refusal of extension of time under s 477(2) Migration Act 1958; Federal Magistrates Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a judicial review application outside 35-day limit after extension is refused, and s 476A(3)(a) bars appeals from such refusal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal.