S1752 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 870

S1752 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 870

The applications for an order nisi were refused because the affidavit filed in each proceeding disclosed no evidence supporting the relief claimed, no further step had been taken after remittal to demonstrate a cause of action, and the applicants' solicitor could not identify any likely evidence or explain what would occur if further time were allowed; in those circumstances it was appropriate to deal with the applications immediately.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for an Order Nisi in Proceedings Concerning Refusal of Protection Visas / On Remittal From the High Court of Australia; Callover in the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
The applications for an order nisi were refused and the applicants were ordered to pay the Minister's costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'order Nisi' 'remitter From the High Court of Australia' 'costs']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'refugee Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'order Nisi' 'remitter From the High Court of Australia' '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 Order Nisi in Proceedings Concerning Refusal of Protection Visas / On Remittal From the High Court of Australia; Callover in the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applications for an order nisi should be dealt with immediately after remittal where the applicants had filed no evidence supporting the relief claimed and had taken no further steps to demonstrate a cause of action.' "Whether further time should be allowed where the applicants' solicitor sought time to obtain instructions but could not indicate what would occur or what evidence was likely to be filed."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for an order nisi were refused because the affidavit filed in each proceeding disclosed no evidence supporting the relief claimed, no further step had been taken after remittal to demonstrate a cause of action, and the applicants' solicitor could not identify any likely evidence or explain what would occur if further time were allowed; in those circumstances it was appropriate to deal with the applications immediately.

Court Disposition

The applications for an order nisi were refused and the applicants were ordered to pay the Minister's costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • ['Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court Rules does not apply.' 'The application for an order nisi be refused.' "The applicant pay the Minister's costs of the proceedings."]