NABU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1580

NABU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1580

Leave to appeal was not made out because the applicant knew his earlier application was before the Court on 23 October 2002, failed to demonstrate an arguable case, and could not point to any aspect of the Tribunal's reasons that would support an appeal. The Tribunal's adverse decision rested on factual analysis and assessment of the applicant as a witness, Wilcox J's discretion had been properly exercised, and any appeal would certainly fail.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal, Treated as an Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders in a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Final Determination of the Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'failure to Appear' 'privative Clause']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'failure to Appear' 'privative Clause']

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 File and Serve a Notice of Appeal, Treated as an Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders in a Migration Judicial Review Proceeding / Final Determination of the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time or leave to appeal from the orders made on 23 October 2002 and 20 November 2002' 'Whether the applicant had explained his absence on 23 October 2002' 'Whether the applicant demonstrated the existence of an arguable case against the Refugee Review Tribunal decision' "Whether the Tribunal's reasons disclosed any appealable error"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was not made out because the applicant knew his earlier application was before the Court on 23 October 2002, failed to demonstrate an arguable case, and could not point to any aspect of the Tribunal's reasons that would support an appeal. The Tribunal's adverse decision rested on factual analysis and assessment of the applicant as a witness, Wilcox J's discretion had been properly exercised, and any appeal would certainly fail.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondent's costs."]