NART v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1343

NART v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1343

The notices of motion were dismissed because the applicants had already been granted an adjournment to seek legal advice, had provided little evidence of attempts to instruct legal advisers or of urgency, were already in contact with a barrister, could not answer the respondent's cogent objections, and the criminal-law authorities relied on were not applicable. The Court had no confidence that further postponement would bring the applicants any closer to legal representation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Applications Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions Affirming Refusals of Protection (class Xa) Visas Under the Migration Act 1958 (cth). / Notices of Motion Seeking to Vacate the Hearing Date of 4 December 2003 So the Applicants Could Seek Legal Advice.
Outcome
The notices of motion filed on 7 November 2003 were dismissed and costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'adjournment' 'stay of Proceedings' 'legal Representation' 'pro Bono Legal Assistance']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['protection Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'adjournment' 'stay of Proceedings' 'legal Representation' 'pro Bono Legal Assistance']

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

Applications Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) for Judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decisions Affirming Refusals of Protection (class Xa) Visas Under the Migration Act 1958 (cth). / Notices of Motion Seeking to Vacate the Hearing Date of 4 December 2003 So the Applicants Could Seek Legal Advice.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hearing date of 4 December 2003 should be vacated or the proceedings stayed to allow the applicants to obtain legal advice.' 'Whether principles concerning stays of serious criminal proceedings for unrepresented indigent accused persons applied to these migration judicial review proceedings.' 'Whether the evidence showed sufficient steps or prospects of obtaining legal representation to justify further postponement.']

Ratio Decidendi

The notices of motion were dismissed because the applicants had already been granted an adjournment to seek legal advice, had provided little evidence of attempts to instruct legal advisers or of urgency, were already in contact with a barrister, could not answer the respondent's cogent objections, and the criminal-law authorities relied on were not applicable. The Court had no confidence that further postponement would bring the applicants any closer to legal representation.

Court Disposition

The notices of motion filed on 7 November 2003 were dismissed and costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed on 7 November 2003 be dismissed.' 'The applicant in N 700 of 2003 and the applicants in N 705 of 2003 file and serve any amended application, any evidence on which they wish to rely and written submissions in support of their application by no later than five working days prior to the...