SZCEQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1397

SZCEQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1397

Leave to appeal was refused because no error of fact or principle appeared from the Federal Magistrate's judgment, the interlocutory decision was not attended with sufficient doubt to warrant leave, and the applicant failed to show that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in a Migration/refugee Judicial Review Matter / Application for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court Refusing to Set Aside Earlier Dismissal Orders
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'setting Aside Dismissal Orders' 'failure to Attend Hearing']
['administrative Law' 'migration Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Decision' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'setting Aside Dismissal Orders' 'failure to Attend Hearing']

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 in a Migration/refugee Judicial Review Matter / Application for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court Refusing to Set Aside Earlier Dismissal Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court decision refusing to set aside orders dismissing the applicant's judicial review application." 'Whether the Federal Magistrates Court decision was attended with sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration by a Full Court.' 'Whether substantial injustice would result if leave to appeal were refused, supposing the decision to be wrong.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no error of fact or principle appeared from the Federal Magistrate's judgment, the interlocutory decision was not attended with sufficient doubt to warrant leave, and the applicant failed to show that substantial injustice would result if leave were refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs, assessed in the sum of $700."]