EUY17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1961

EUY17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1961

The appeal was incompetent as it challenged interlocutory orders without leave, and the trial judge had no power to grant an extension of time for appeal after expiry of the statutory period. The application was an abuse of process because it was bound to fail due to the mandatory operation of s 91WA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

Parties
Appellant: EUY17; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs; Second Respondent: Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Third Respondent: Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Objection to Competency
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as incompetent
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Appeal Procedure, Abuse of Process, Competency of Appeal, Extension of Time
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Migration Law Human Rights Protection Visa Appeal Procedure Abuse of Process Competency of Appeal +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EUY17

Appellant

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

First Respondent

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Second Respondent

Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Objection to Competency

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal from interlocutory orders is competent without leave
  2. 2 Whether there was power to extend time for filing notice of appeal after expiry
  3. 3 Whether the appellant’s challenge has any prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was incompetent as it challenged interlocutory orders without leave, and the trial judge had no power to grant an extension of time for appeal after expiry of the statutory period. The application was an abuse of process because it was bound to fail due to the mandatory operation of s 91WA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as incompetent

Orders

  • The notice of appeal be dismissed as incompetent.
  • The appellant pays the first respondent's costs.