Patel v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (No 2) [2012] FCA 1020
The application should be dismissed as no submissions were filed by the appellant in support, indicating abandonment of the application, and no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify re-opening argument after judgment was reserved. Additionally, the relevance of the High Court decision in Plaintiff M70/2011 to the appellant's case was not substantiated.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 17 September 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Interlocutory Application Post Hearing; Judgment on Dismissal of Application to Re Open Argument
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['application to Re Open Argument' 'leave to Re Open Argument After Judgment Reserved' 'exceptional Circumstances for Further Submissions']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application Post Hearing; Judgment on Dismissal of Application to Re Open Argument
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the appellant should be granted leave to re-open argument in the appeal after judgment was reserved' 'Whether the High Court decision in Plaintiff M70/2011 is relevant to the appeal']
Ratio Decidendi
The application should be dismissed as no submissions were filed by the appellant in support, indicating abandonment of the application, and no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify re-opening argument after judgment was reserved. Additionally, the relevance of the High Court decision in Plaintiff M70/2011 to the appellant's case was not substantiated.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- ['The application be dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment