SZEVR v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 262

SZEVR v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 262

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant provided no particulars of any ground showing error by the Federal Magistrate, no doubt was cast on the correctness of the decision that the Federal Magistrates Court application was incompetent, prior decisions had established no jurisdictional error in the RRT findings, and no substantial injustice would result from refusing leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in Migration Judicial Review Proceedings / Leave to Appeal Refused
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['protection Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'competency' 'extension or Time Limits for Judicial Review' 'leave to Appeal' 'abuse of Process']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['protection Visas' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'jurisdictional Error' 'competency' 'extension or Time Limits for Judicial Review' 'leave to Appeal' 'abuse of Process']

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 Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from interlocutory orders of the Federal Magistrates Court.' "Whether the Federal Magistrate's decision upholding the objection to competency and dismissing the judicial review application was attended by sufficient doubt." 'Whether refusal of leave would cause substantial injustice.' 'Whether the Federal Magistrates Court had power to order that no further application to review the RRT decision be accepted for filing except with leave of the court.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant provided no particulars of any ground showing error by the Federal Magistrate, no doubt was cast on the correctness of the decision that the Federal Magistrates Court application was incompetent, prior decisions had established no jurisdictional error in the RRT findings, and no substantial injustice would result from refusing leave.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is refused.' 'The adult applicants pay costs of the application fixed in the amount of $1400.00.']