Haider v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 216

Haider v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 216

The proposed grounds of appeal had no reasonable prospects of success. The primary judge accepted the applicant's explanation for non-appearance and correctly treated the reinstatement application as depending on the prospects of the substantive judicial review. It was open to the primary judge, as it had been to the Tribunal, to characterise the 4 September 2018 Tribunal application as an application made by the sponsor, not by the visa applicant, and the 7 September 2018 application by the applicant was out of time. On that basis the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction, the primary judge did not err, and the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissed
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'temporary Business Entry (class Uc) Visa' 'out of Time Merits Review Application']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'judicial Review' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'temporary Business Entry (class Uc) Visa' 'out of Time Merits Review Application']

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

Migration Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether time should be extended for the applicant to seek leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court's interlocutory judgment refusing reinstatement." 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the dismissal of the reinstatement application.' 'Whether the proposed grounds of appeal had reasonable prospects of success.' "Whether the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the review application lodged within time was made by the sponsor and the applicant's later review application was lodged out of time."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed grounds of appeal had no reasonable prospects of success. The primary judge accepted the applicant's explanation for non-appearance and correctly treated the reinstatement application as depending on the prospects of the substantive judicial review. It was open to the primary judge, as it had been to the Tribunal, to characterise the 4 September 2018 Tribunal application as an application made by the sponsor, not by the visa applicant, and the 7 September 2018 application by the applicant was out of time. On that basis the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction, the primary judge did not err, and the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The name of the first respondent be amended to "Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs".' "The applicant's application for an extension of time and leave to appeal be dismissed." "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $4,000."]