DKT17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1629

DKT17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 1629

The application for extension of time to appeal was refused because, although there was an adequate explanation for the short delay, the proposed grounds of appeal lacked sufficient particularity and reasonable prospects of success; no appealable error or jurisdictional error was discerned in the lower court or the Authority's decision.

Parties
Applicant: DKT17; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Immigration Assessment Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Safe Haven Enterprise Visa, Jurisdictional Error, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment
Migration Law Administrative Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Safe Haven Enterprise Visa Jurisdictional Error Procedural Fairness Credibility Assessment

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DKT17

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Immigration Assessment Authority

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Decision on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided an adequate explanation for the delay in filing the appeal
  2. 2 Whether the draft notice of appeal contains grounds with reasonable prospects of success
  3. 3 Whether any appealable error or jurisdictional error was made by the Federal Circuit Court or the Immigration Assessment Authority

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time to appeal was refused because, although there was an adequate explanation for the short delay, the proposed grounds of appeal lacked sufficient particularity and reasonable prospects of success; no appealable error or jurisdictional error was discerned in the lower court or the Authority's decision.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.