EWX17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 235

EWX17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCA 235

There was no jurisdictional error by the primary judge in limiting consideration to matters advanced by the applicant, nor was there a denial of procedural fairness or legal unreasonableness in refusing to extend time; accordingly, neither ground of review could succeed and the application was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['judicial Review' 'extension of Time' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Appeal / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the primary judge was obliged to consider matters not advanced by the applicant in an extension of time application under s 477(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)' 'Whether failure to consider such matters constitutes jurisdictional error' 'Whether failure to make findings on matters not put constitutes denial of procedural fairness']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no jurisdictional error by the primary judge in limiting consideration to matters advanced by the applicant, nor was there a denial of procedural fairness or legal unreasonableness in refusing to extend time; accordingly, neither ground of review could succeed and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Leave to rely upon an amended originating application be refused.' 'The originating application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs as assessed or agreed."]