Jang v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1697

Jang v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1697

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to comply with the Court's direction to file written submissions, failed to appear when the matter was called and recalled, and failed to prosecute the proceeding with due diligence; the Court also saw no reasonable argument that would entitle the applicants to succeed even if extension of time and leave to appeal were granted, and did not consider that the interests of justice required leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time to Serve a Notice of Appeal From a Judgment of a Federal Magistrate / Application Dismissed at Hearing Under O 35 a R 2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (cth)
Outcome
Application dismissed; adult applicants ordered to pay respondents' costs fixed at $1,600.00.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'dismissal for Failure to Appear' 'want of Prosecution' 'costs']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'dismissal for Failure to Appear' 'want of Prosecution' 'costs']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time to Serve a Notice of Appeal From a Judgment of a Federal Magistrate / Application Dismissed at Hearing Under O 35 a R 2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time in which to serve a notice of appeal from the judgment of the Federal Magistrate.' 'Whether the proceeding should be dismissed under O 35A r 2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) because the applicants failed to file written submissions and failed to appear to prosecute the proceeding with due diligence.' 'Whether the respondents should have their costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to comply with the Court's direction to file written submissions, failed to appear when the matter was called and recalled, and failed to prosecute the proceeding with due diligence; the Court also saw no reasonable argument that would entitle the applicants to succeed even if extension of time and leave to appeal were granted, and did not consider that the interests of justice required leave.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; adult applicants ordered to pay respondents' costs fixed at $1,600.00.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed pursuant to O 35A r2 of the Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth).' 'The first, second and third applicants pay the costs of the respondents, the sum of which is fixed at $1,600.00.']