CEZ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 631

CEZ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 631

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not demonstrate sufficient doubt in the correctness of the Federal Circuit Court's refusal to adjourn the show cause hearing, did not show arguable procedural unfairness or appealable error, and did not identify arguable appealable error in the dismissal of his judicial review application. The primary judge had correctly identified and applied the relevant principles, gave comprehensive and rational reasons for refusing a further adjournment, and correctly rejected the sole judicial review ground and the reliance on MZAFZ and Singh because there was no s 438 certificate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused, with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'adjournment' 'procedural Fairness' 'judicial Review' 'protection Visa' 'show Cause Dismissal']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'adjournment' 'procedural Fairness' 'judicial Review' 'protection Visa' 'show Cause Dismissal']

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 Leave to Appeal From Orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s 24(1A) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' "Whether the Federal Circuit Court's refusal to adjourn the show cause hearing was attended by sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration on appeal." 'Whether substantial injustice would result if leave to appeal were refused.' "Whether the Federal Circuit Court's dismissal of the judicial review application disclosed arguable appealable error."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not demonstrate sufficient doubt in the correctness of the Federal Circuit Court's refusal to adjourn the show cause hearing, did not show arguable procedural unfairness or appealable error, and did not identify arguable appealable error in the dismissal of his judicial review application. The primary judge had correctly identified and applied the relevant principles, gave comprehensive and rational reasons for refusing a further adjournment, and correctly rejected the sole judicial review ground and the reliance on MZAFZ and Singh because there was no s 438 certificate.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused, with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is refused.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs, as agreed or assessed."]