Pal v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1362

Pal v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1362

The application for an extension of time was refused because the proposed application for leave to appeal had no prospect of success. The applicant's second Federal Circuit Court judicial review application was commenced without disclosing the prior judicial review proceeding already brought in relation to the same Tribunal decision, contrary to s 486D(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), so the primary judge's conclusion that the second application was incompetent or a nullity was not shown to be wrong or arguably wrong. Further, there was unlikely to be substantial injustice because the Minister treated the applicant's first judicial review application as being "on foot".

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From an Order of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for an extension of time and leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review of Migration Decision' 'disclosure of Prior Judicial Review Proceedings' 'interlocutory Orders' 'costs']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review of Migration Decision' 'disclosure of Prior Judicial Review Proceedings' 'interlocutory Orders' '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

Application for an Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From an Order of the Federal Circuit Court Dismissing an Application for Judicial Review / Federal Court Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court order.' 'Whether the Federal Circuit Court order was interlocutory and required leave to appeal.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had any prospect of success in light of s 486D(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).' 'Whether refusal of leave would cause substantial injustice to the applicant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the proposed application for leave to appeal had no prospect of success. The applicant's second Federal Circuit Court judicial review application was commenced without disclosing the prior judicial review proceeding already brought in relation to the same Tribunal decision, contrary to s 486D(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), so the primary judge's conclusion that the second application was incompetent or a nullity was not shown to be wrong or arguably wrong. Further, there was unlikely to be substantial injustice because the Minister treated the applicant's first judicial review application as being "on foot".

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time and leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for an extension of time and leave to appeal dated 1 May 2017 be refused." "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application to be taxed in default of agreement."]