SZHJJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1000

SZHJJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1000

The application for an extension of time was refused because the proposed appeal disclosed no arguable ground and no prospect of success. Article 33 could not assist the applicant because the Tribunal had found that he was not a refugee, the earlier complaints of bias, failure to consider relevant matters and procedural unfairness disclosed no jurisdictional error, and the applicant did not appear to explain the delay.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Migration; Application for Extension of Time to File a Notice of Appeal From Orders of the Federal Magistrates Court Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Application for Extension of Time Before the Federal Court
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'country Information' 'apprehended Bias' 'non Refoulement' 'article 33 of the Refugee Convention']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'country Information' 'apprehended Bias' 'non Refoulement' 'article 33 of the Refugee Convention']

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 to File a Notice of Appeal From Orders of the Federal Magistrates Court Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision / Application for Extension of Time Before the Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether time should be extended to file a notice of appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court's orders." 'Whether the proposed appeal had any prospect of success.' "Whether the Tribunal was biased or apprehended to be biased in assessing the applicant's evidence and country information." "Whether the Tribunal failed to take into account relevant considerations or improperly weighed the applicant's claims against country information." 'Whether the Tribunal was required to disclose country information under s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) or otherwise denied procedural fairness.' 'Whether Article 33 of the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees applied where the Tribunal had not found the applicant to be a refugee.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the proposed appeal disclosed no arguable ground and no prospect of success. Article 33 could not assist the applicant because the Tribunal had found that he was not a refugee, the earlier complaints of bias, failure to consider relevant matters and procedural unfairness disclosed no jurisdictional error, and the applicant did not appear to explain the delay.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time be refused.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs in the sum of $1,100."]