Ng v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1795

Ng v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCA 1795

The Applicant applied for the Medical Treatment visa on 17 May 2016, over six years after his last substantive visa expired on 28 January 2010, and was therefore outside the 28-day period required by the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). Because he was not eligible for the visa and the Federal Circuit Court was plainly correct to find no reviewable error, any appeal would be hopeless, so the extension of time was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court / Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['medical Treatment (visitor) (class Ub) Visa' 'visa Eligibility Criteria' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['medical Treatment (visitor) (class Ub) Visa' 'visa Eligibility Criteria' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court / Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to appeal from orders of the Federal Circuit Court made on 12 April 2018.' 'Whether the Applicant was eligible for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa despite applying more than 28 days after his last substantive visa expired.' 'Whether any appeal from the Federal Circuit Court would have merit.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant applied for the Medical Treatment visa on 17 May 2016, over six years after his last substantive visa expired on 28 January 2010, and was therefore outside the 28-day period required by the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). Because he was not eligible for the visa and the Federal Circuit Court was plainly correct to find no reviewable error, any appeal would be hopeless, so the extension of time was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time be dismissed with costs.']