SZKHU v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2008] FCA 947

SZKHU v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2008] FCA 947

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because, even if part of the delay were explained by the late receipt of written reasons, the application was still filed outside the prescribed period and the proposed appeal had no merit. The Randhawa ground was misconceived because relocation did not arise; Barnes FM had comprehensively dealt with the natural justice and notification issues; and nothing before the Court suggested any error, let alone jurisdictional error, by Barnes FM. The proposed appeal was doomed to fail, so extending time would serve no useful purpose.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for an Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Federal Court Application From Judgment and Orders of Barnes FM Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Application for an extension of time dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'notification of Tribunal Hearing' 'internal Relocation Principle']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'protection Visa Refusal' 'refugee Review Tribunal Review' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'notification of Tribunal Hearing' 'internal Relocation Principle']

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 an Extension of Time to File and Serve a Notice of Appeal / Federal Court Application From Judgment and Orders of Barnes FM Dismissing Judicial Review of a Refugee Review Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended to file and serve a notice of appeal from the orders of Barnes FM made on 30 October 2007.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had any prospect of success.' 'Whether Barnes FM erred in finding no jurisdictional error, denial of natural justice, procedural unfairness, or error concerning Refugee Review Tribunal notification and hearing procedures.' "Whether Randhawa v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1994) 52 FCR 437 applied to the applicant's claims."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because, even if part of the delay were explained by the late receipt of written reasons, the application was still filed outside the prescribed period and the proposed appeal had no merit. The Randhawa ground was misconceived because relocation did not arise; Barnes FM had comprehensively dealt with the natural justice and notification issues; and nothing before the Court suggested any error, let alone jurisdictional error, by Barnes FM. The proposed appeal was doomed to fail, so extending time would serve no useful purpose.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time in which to file a Notice of Appeal against the orders of Barnes FM on 30 October 2007 is dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to this application, to be taxed if not agreed."]