Kio v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 579

Kio v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 579

The extension of time was granted because the 45 day delay was not significant in the circumstances, the applicant gave an adequate explanation based on detention, language difficulties and difficulty obtaining legal advice, the Minister did not contend that he would suffer prejudice, refusal could expose the applicant to serious consequences on removal, and proposed grounds 2 and 5 were reasonably arguable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time to Lodge an Application for Judicial Review / Application for Extension of Time Allowed
Outcome
Application allowed.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'judicial Review of Migration Decision' 'visa Cancellation' 'character Test' 'national Interest']
['migration' 'administrative Law'] ['extension of Time' 'judicial Review of Migration Decision' 'visa Cancellation' 'character Test' 'national Interest']

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

Migration Application for Extension of Time to Lodge an Application for Judicial Review / Application for Extension of Time Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court should extend time under s 477A(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) for the applicant to lodge an application for review of the Minister's decision of 19 June 2018." 'Whether the applicant gave an adequate explanation for being 45 days late.' 'Whether the proposed application for review had reasonable prospects of success.' 'Whether the Minister would suffer prejudice if an extension of time were granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was granted because the 45 day delay was not significant in the circumstances, the applicant gave an adequate explanation based on detention, language difficulties and difficulty obtaining legal advice, the Minister did not contend that he would suffer prejudice, refusal could expose the applicant to serious consequences on removal, and proposed grounds 2 and 5 were reasonably arguable.

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • ["The application for an extension of time within which to lodge an application for review against the Respondent's decision of 19 June 2018 is allowed." 'The Applicant have leave to file an amended application for review within 14 days.' 'Costs in the cause.']