CKW15 v Federal Circuit Court of Australia [2018] FCA 2010

CKW15 v Federal Circuit Court of Australia [2018] FCA 2010

The applicant failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for a delay of over two years in bringing his application. The medical evidence did not demonstrate that, had it been before the Tribunal, the decision as to the applicant's credibility would have necessarily been different, nor did it provide a sufficient basis to find that the Tribunal's decision was legally unreasonable or based on non-existent facts. The lack of explanation for delay, together with the lack of substantive merit in the new evidence, meant that it was not necessary in the interests of justice to grant an extension of time, and no jurisdictional error or legal unreasonableness by the Federal Circuit Court was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Constitutional Writ Relief and Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'legal Unreasonableness']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'constitutional Law'] ['extension of Time' 'judicial Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'legal Unreasonableness']

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

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Constitutional Writ Relief and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Federal Circuit Court committed jurisdictional error in refusing to extend time for judicial review under Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 477' "Whether new medical evidence not before the Tribunal made the Tribunal's decision legally unreasonable"]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for a delay of over two years in bringing his application. The medical evidence did not demonstrate that, had it been before the Tribunal, the decision as to the applicant's credibility would have necessarily been different, nor did it provide a sufficient basis to find that the Tribunal's decision was legally unreasonable or based on non-existent facts. The lack of explanation for delay, together with the lack of substantive merit in the new evidence, meant that it was not necessary in the interests of justice to grant an extension of time, and no jurisdictional error or legal unreasonableness by the Federal Circuit Court was...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the second respondent's costs."]