CQW17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1436

CQW17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1436

Given the extreme length of the delay and the inadequacy of the explanation provided, along with the lack of merit in the proposed appeal (as there was no discernible error by the primary judge or the Authority, and the Authority's decision-making process was intelligible and reasonably justified), the application for extension of time to appeal was refused.

Parties
Applicant: CQW17; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Immigration Assessment Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed; costs ordered against applicant.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Judicial Review, Jurisdictional Error, Unreasonableness in Decision Making
Administrative Law Immigration Law Extension of Time to Appeal Judicial Review Jurisdictional Error Unreasonableness in Decision Making

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CQW17

Applicant

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Immigration Assessment Authority

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an acceptable explanation for the 3-year delay in seeking an extension of time to appeal
  2. 2 Whether the proposed appeal from the primary judge's decision had reasonable prospects of success (merit)
  3. 3 Whether the Immigration Assessment Authority acted unreasonably in not inviting the applicant to provide further information regarding inconsistencies in his submissions

Ratio Decidendi

Given the extreme length of the delay and the inadequacy of the explanation provided, along with the lack of merit in the proposed appeal (as there was no discernible error by the primary judge or the Authority, and the Authority's decision-making process was intelligible and reasonably justified), the application for extension of time to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed; costs ordered against applicant.

Orders

  • The name of the first respondent be amended to 'Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs'.
  • The application for an extension of time to appeal, filed on 21 April 2022, be dismissed.