Rogers v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 750

There is no merit in the application since the applicant was afforded procedural fairness by being notified and given an opportunity to attend the hearing, and no satisfactory explanation was given for the delay; accordingly, the application for an extension of time is refused.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 06 June 2003
Procedural Posture: Application for Extension of Time and Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome: Application dismissed with costs to first respondent.
Legal Topics: ['extension of Time' 'procedural Fairness' 'judicial Review']

['administrative Law' 'migration Law'] ['extension of Time' 'procedural Fairness' 'judicial Review']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time and Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to seek relief to quash the Migration Review Tribunal's decision" 'Whether there was a breach of procedural fairness giving rise to jurisdictional error']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs to first respondent.

Orders

['Application by notice of motion for an extension of time is refused.' 'Application is dismissed.' "Applicant to pay the first respondent's costs fixed at $1250, including disbursements." 'No order for costs of the second and third respondents.']