DIV16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 1451

DIV16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 1451

The applicant did not identify any arguable case of jurisdictional error in the draft notice of appeal. The primary judge and the IAA applied the forward-looking test and adequately considered relevant country information. There was no utility in granting the extension of time, and the application must be refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'forward Looking Test' 'declining Security Situation']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['extension of Time' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'forward Looking Test' 'declining Security Situation']

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 File Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant is entitled to an extension of time to file an appeal' 'Whether the primary judge erred in dismissing ground 1 of the application for review']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not identify any arguable case of jurisdictional error in the draft notice of appeal. The primary judge and the IAA applied the forward-looking test and adequately considered relevant country information. There was no utility in granting the extension of time, and the application must be refused.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time filed on 18 December 2018 be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]