CVC16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 556

CVC16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 556

The applicant failed to establish any merit in the proposed grounds of appeal, which were found to be unparticularised, largely directed to the Tribunal rather than the primary judgment, and amounted to no more than impermissible merits review rather than jurisdictional error. The applicant's absence from Australia and lack of compliance with court orders further militated against granting an extension of time. Thus, extension of time to appeal was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Final Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application to extend time dismissed
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'protection Visa']
['migration Law'] ['judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'protection Visa']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal / Final Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time to appeal should be granted' "Whether there were jurisdictional errors in the Tribunal's decision" 'Whether the grounds of appeal disclosed arguable merit']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish any merit in the proposed grounds of appeal, which were found to be unparticularised, largely directed to the Tribunal rather than the primary judgment, and amounted to no more than impermissible merits review rather than jurisdictional error. The applicant's absence from Australia and lack of compliance with court orders further militated against granting an extension of time. Thus, extension of time to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application to extend time dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application to extend time filed on 15 July 2020 be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs."]