BZAG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 392

BZAG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 392

The applicants gave no explanation for filing out of time, identified no error in Federal Magistrate Baumann's decision, and their proposed appeal had no prospects of success. The application before the Federal Magistrates Court had been filed in breach of prior orders requiring leave before any further review application concerning the Tribunal decision could be accepted, and therefore constituted a significant and obvious abuse of the process of the Court. The Court accordingly refused the extension of time and leave to appeal, and ordered indemnity costs fixed in a gross sum.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Migration Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court Concerning Protection Visa Review Proceedings / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve an Application for Leave to Appeal, and Application for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; application for leave to appeal refused; applicants ordered to pay respondent's indemnity costs fixed at $3000.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment' 'abuse of Process' 'indemnity Costs' 'gross Sum Costs']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment' 'abuse of Process' 'indemnity Costs' 'gross Sum 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Migration Appeal From the Federal Magistrates Court Concerning Protection Visa Review Proceedings / Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve an Application for Leave to Appeal, and Application for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to file and serve an application for leave to appeal.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted from Federal Magistrate Baumann's interlocutory judgment summarily dismissing the application." 'Whether the proceedings filed in breach of previous orders constituted an abuse of process.' 'Whether indemnity costs should be ordered against the applicants in a fixed sum.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants gave no explanation for filing out of time, identified no error in Federal Magistrate Baumann's decision, and their proposed appeal had no prospects of success. The application before the Federal Magistrates Court had been filed in breach of prior orders requiring leave before any further review application concerning the Tribunal decision could be accepted, and therefore constituted a significant and obvious abuse of the process of the Court. The Court accordingly refused the extension of time and leave to appeal, and ordered indemnity costs fixed in a gross sum.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; application for leave to appeal refused; applicants ordered to pay respondent's indemnity costs fixed at $3000.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time in which to file and serve an application for leave to appeal is refused.' 'The application for leave to appeal is refused.' 'The applicants pay the costs of the respondent on an indemnity basis, fixed in the sum of $3000.']