S234 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 493

S234 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 493

The application was out of time and no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify an extension. There was no error of law or jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal, and the Tribunal's decision was a privative clause decision under s 474 Migration Act 1958 (Cth), precluding relief. The application should be dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: S234 of 2003; First Respondent: Refugee Review Tribunal; Second Respondent: Secretary of the Department of Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs; Third Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Decision After Remittal From High Court
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Refugee Protection Visa, Procedural Fairness, Privative Clause Decision, Extension of Time
Migration Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Refugee Protection Visa Procedural Fairness Privative Clause Decision Extension of Time

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S234 of 2003

Applicant

Refugee Review Tribunal

First Respondent

Secretary of the Department of Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

Second Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Decision After Remittal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for judicial review of the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision was out of time
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error or denied procedural fairness
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal's decision was a privative clause decision under s 474 Migration Act 1958 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The application was out of time and no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify an extension. There was no error of law or jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal, and the Tribunal's decision was a privative clause decision under s 474 Migration Act 1958 (Cth), precluding relief. The application should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • the application be dismissed
  • the applicant pay the second and third respondents' costs