SRYYY v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 171

SRYYY v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 171

In the particular and peculiar circumstances, and as a matter of fairness to the applicant, the application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time should be referred to a Full Court, especially because determining it would potentially require revisiting whether Lindgren J's judgment was truly interlocutory.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and for an Extension of Time / Referral of Application to a Full Court for Decision
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time referred to a Full Court for decision.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'privative Clause Decision' 'jurisdictional Error' 'competency of Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'referral to Full Court']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'privative Clause Decision' 'jurisdictional Error' 'competency of Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'referral to Full Court']

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 Leave to Appeal and for an Extension of Time / Referral of Application to a Full Court for Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time should be determined by a single judge or referred to a Full Court.' 'Whether the characterisation of the earlier decision as interlocutory or final affected the applicable appeal period.']

Ratio Decidendi

In the particular and peculiar circumstances, and as a matter of fairness to the applicant, the application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time should be referred to a Full Court, especially because determining it would potentially require revisiting whether Lindgren J's judgment was truly interlocutory.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time referred to a Full Court for decision.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time be referred to a Full Court for decision.']