CXH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1498

CXH16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1498

The extension of time was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any sustainable factual or legal basis for disagreement with the Federal Circuit Court decision or unfairness, and her explanations of financial difficulty and inability to obtain help were unsupported assertions. Leave to appeal would in any event have been refused because the proposed grounds did not identify appellable error and disclosed no real prospects of success.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From Dismissal by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; proceeding dismissed; leave to appeal refused in substance because it would have been refused if reached.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'appellable Error' 'jurisdictional Error']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'protection Visa' 'appellable Error' 'jurisdictional Error']

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 and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court Application From Dismissal by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to seek leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from an interlocutory decision dismissing the Federal Circuit Court application under r 44.12(1)(a) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth).' 'Whether the proposed grounds identified any appellable error or real prospect of success.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the Applicant failed to identify any sustainable factual or legal basis for disagreement with the Federal Circuit Court decision or unfairness, and her explanations of financial difficulty and inability to obtain help were unsupported assertions. Leave to appeal would in any event have been refused because the proposed grounds did not identify appellable error and disclosed no real prospects of success.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; proceeding dismissed; leave to appeal refused in substance because it would have been refused if reached.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time is refused.' 'The proceeding is dismissed.' 'The Applicant is to pay the costs of the First Respondent, either as agreed or assessed.']