EZA17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 713
The application was dismissed because no adequate explanation for delay was provided, and there were no reasonable prospects that the appeal would be successful. The balance of convenience did not favour granting interlocutory relief given statutory requirements for removal and the lack of merit in the substantive application.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Urgent Interlocutory Relief, Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['interlocutory Relief' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'removal From Australia' 'jurisdictional Error' 'prospects of Success']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Urgent Interlocutory Relief, Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient prospects of success in application for extension of time and leave to appeal' 'Whether balance of convenience lies in favour of granting relief' 'Adequacy of explanation for delay']
Ratio Decidendi
The application was dismissed because no adequate explanation for delay was provided, and there were no reasonable prospects that the appeal would be successful. The balance of convenience did not favour granting interlocutory relief given statutory requirements for removal and the lack of merit in the substantive application.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment