Pannu v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] FCA 1282

Pannu v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] FCA 1282

Given the applicant's unexplained and repeated non-attendance, lack of credible justification, inconsistencies in explanations for absence, failure to comply with court directions, and lack of merit in the underlying judicial review application, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed pursuant to rule...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed for Non Attendance at Hearing
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['dismissal for Non Attendance' 'application for Leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'migration Review Tribunal' 'adjournment Requests']
['migration Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['dismissal for Non Attendance' 'application for Leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'migration Review Tribunal' 'adjournment Requests']

Source-derived case record

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 Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed for Non Attendance at Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application for leave to appeal should be dismissed for non-attendance under rule 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011' 'Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for non-attendance' 'Whether the underlying application had reasonable prospects of success']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the applicant's unexplained and repeated non-attendance, lack of credible justification, inconsistencies in explanations for absence, failure to comply with court directions, and lack of merit in the underlying judicial review application, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed pursuant to rule 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to rule 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.' "The applicant to pay the first respondent's costs of the application for leave, including the costs of the 15 November 2013 attendance."]