Johal v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 1280

Johal v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 1280

The extension of time was refused because none of the proposed grounds of appeal had sufficient merit: there was no duty on the Federal Circuit Court or the Tribunal to investigate the applicant's family violence claim and the applicant had not furnished evidence satisfying the visa criteria; any procedural fairness breach arising from non-disclosure of the s 375A certificate was immaterial because the material had no bearing on whether the applicant was a victim of family violence; and the bias allegation was an unparticularised assertion based only on the primary judge not accepting the applicant's arguments.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal From Dismissal of Judicial Review by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Outcome
The application for an extension of time was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['partner (migrant) (class Bc) (subclass 100) Visa' 'family Violence Criteria' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'section 375 a Certificate' 'jurisdictional Error' 'bias']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'procedural Fairness'] ['partner (migrant) (class Bc) (subclass 100) Visa' 'family Violence Criteria' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'section 375 a Certificate' 'jurisdictional Error' 'bias']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time to Appeal From Dismissal of Judicial Review by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted where the applicant was five days out of time in lodging an appeal.' 'Whether the proposed ground that the Federal Circuit Court failed to investigate or assess family violence claims had sufficient merit.' 'Whether non-disclosure of a certificate under s 375A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) amounted to material jurisdictional error.' 'Whether an unparticularised allegation of bias by the primary judge raised an arguable ground of appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because none of the proposed grounds of appeal had sufficient merit: there was no duty on the Federal Circuit Court or the Tribunal to investigate the applicant's family violence claim and the applicant had not furnished evidence satisfying the visa criteria; any procedural fairness breach arising from non-disclosure of the s 375A certificate was immaterial because the material had no bearing on whether the applicant was a victim of family violence; and the bias allegation was an unparticularised assertion based only on the primary judge not accepting the applicant's arguments.

Court Disposition

The application for an extension of time was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement."]