EPH17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 824

EPH17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 824

Although the applicant did not expressly seek an adjournment, the primary judge was told that the applicant's solicitor had suddenly withdrawn the day before the hearing. Given the applicant's limited English, lack of legal knowledge, self-represented status, and evident inability to make meaningful submissions, the primary judge was required to clarify what had happened and whether the applicant sought an adjournment, and to adjourn if that was what he sought. The failure to do so deprived the applicant of a reasonable opportunity to present his case and breached the rules of natural justice, warranting leave and allowing the appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Allowed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; Federal Circuit Court orders set aside; proceeding remitted for trial in the Federal Circuit Court; first respondent to pay the applicant's costs in this Court as agreed or taxed.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice' 'adjournment' 'self Represented Litigants' 'leave to Appeal' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa' 'immigration Assessment Authority']
['practice and Procedure' 'migration' 'administrative Law'] ['procedural Fairness' 'natural Justice' 'adjournment' 'self Represented Litigants' 'leave to Appeal' 'safe Haven Enterprise Visa' 'immigration Assessment Authority']

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 Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court's dismissal of the applicant's judicial review application." "Whether the primary judge denied the applicant procedural fairness by failing to clarify whether he sought an adjournment after being told that the applicant's solicitor had withdrawn the day before the hearing." 'Whether the applicant was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to present his case.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant did not expressly seek an adjournment, the primary judge was told that the applicant's solicitor had suddenly withdrawn the day before the hearing. Given the applicant's limited English, lack of legal knowledge, self-represented status, and evident inability to make meaningful submissions, the primary judge was required to clarify what had happened and whether the applicant sought an adjournment, and to adjourn if that was what he sought. The failure to do so deprived the applicant of a reasonable opportunity to present his case and breached the rules of natural justice, warranting leave and allowing the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; Federal Circuit Court orders set aside; proceeding remitted for trial in the Federal Circuit Court; first respondent to pay the applicant's costs in this Court as agreed or taxed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal from the orders of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made on 19 September 2018 be granted.' 'The appeal be allowed.' 'The orders made by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia on 19 September 2018 be set aside.' 'The proceeding be remitted for trial in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.'...