SZELL v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 457

SZELL v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 457

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not identify any reason why leave should be granted, did not establish that an appeal would have any realistic prospect of success, and relied only on matters that would impermissibly require the Court to undertake merits review of the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision; granting leave would therefore be futile.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Summary Dismissal by the Federal Magistrates Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'privative Clause Decision' 'constitutional Writs' 'abuse of Process' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'time Limits']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Civil Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'privative Clause Decision' 'constitutional Writs' 'abuse of Process' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'time Limits']

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 Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Summary Dismissal by the Federal Magistrates Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Magistrate's interlocutory order summarily dismissing the application as an abuse of process." 'Whether the applicant identified error or a realistic prospect of success sufficient to justify leave to appeal.' "Whether the matters relied on by the applicant impermissibly invited merits review of the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not identify any reason why leave should be granted, did not establish that an appeal would have any realistic prospect of success, and relied only on matters that would impermissibly require the Court to undertake merits review of the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision; granting leave would therefore be futile.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.']