CQX18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 386

CQX18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 386

Even assuming in the applicant's favour that the Federal Circuit Court's failure to publish written reasons within the 21 day appeal period constituted jurisdictional error, writs of certiorari and mandamus should be refused because the applicant still had an appellate remedy by applying under FCR 36.05 for an extension of time to appeal, which was a more convenient and satisfactory remedy. The application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus / Judicial Review in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application for Review of a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs; directions made to remove and substitute respondents.
Legal Topics
['jurisdictional Error' 'certiorari and Mandamus' 'late Publication of Reasons' 'appeal Time' 'proper Respondents to Judicial Review Proceedings' 'discretionary Refusal of Relief Where Appellate Remedies Remain Available']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review' 'practice and Procedure'] ['jurisdictional Error' 'certiorari and Mandamus' 'late Publication of Reasons' 'appeal Time' 'proper Respondents to Judicial Review Proceedings' 'discretionary Refusal of Relief Where Appellate Remedies Remain Available']

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 Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus / Judicial Review in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application for Review of a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Federal Circuit Court acted outside jurisdiction where it made orders and gave oral reasons but did not publish written reasons until after the appeal period had expired.' 'Whether writs of certiorari and mandamus should issue where the applicant could apply for leave to appeal out of time.' 'Whether Judge Street, the Judges of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, the Minister for Home Affairs and the Immigration Assessment Authority were proper respondents.']

Ratio Decidendi

Even assuming in the applicant's favour that the Federal Circuit Court's failure to publish written reasons within the 21 day appeal period constituted jurisdictional error, writs of certiorari and mandamus should be refused because the applicant still had an appellate remedy by applying under FCR 36.05 for an extension of time to appeal, which was a more convenient and satisfactory remedy. The application was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs; directions made to remove and substitute respondents.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed with costs.' 'The First and Fourth Respondents be removed as separate parties to the proceedings.' "The Second Respondent be changed to 'The Federal Circuit Court of Australia'." 'The Third Respondent become the First Respondent.']