SZKMV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 651

SZKMV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 651

The injunction was refused because the proposed appeal and extension of time application had no prospects of success. The asserted grounds either had been addressed by the Tribunal on the material before it, lacked substance, were new matters not raised before the Tribunal, or could not provide a basis for this Court to give the applicant a further chance to seek a visa based on changed circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Migration Matter; Interlocutory Application for an Injunction Restraining Removal From Australia / Urgent Interlocutory Hearing on Injunction Pending an Application for Extension of Time and Draft Notice of Appeal From the Tribunal
Outcome
Interlocutory application for injunction dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'removal From Australia' 'partner Visa Refusal' 'ministerial Intervention' 'non Refoulement' 'best Interests of Child' 'extension of Time']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'human Rights'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'removal From Australia' 'partner Visa Refusal' 'ministerial Intervention' 'non Refoulement' 'best Interests of Child' 'extension of Time']

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 Matter; Interlocutory Application for an Injunction Restraining Removal From Australia / Urgent Interlocutory Hearing on Injunction Pending an Application for Extension of Time and Draft Notice of Appeal From the Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an interlocutory injunction restraining his removal from Australia to Nigeria until the proposed proceedings were finalised' 'Whether the proposed appeal and application for extension of time disclosed a prima facie case or any prospects of success' "Whether the Tribunal failed to give proper consideration to the applicant's relationship and family" "Whether Australia's international obligations and non-refoulement considerations were addressed"]

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction was refused because the proposed appeal and extension of time application had no prospects of success. The asserted grounds either had been addressed by the Tribunal on the material before it, lacked substance, were new matters not raised before the Tribunal, or could not provide a basis for this Court to give the applicant a further chance to seek a visa based on changed circumstances.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application for injunction dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application for an injunction be dismissed.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the first respondent as taxed or agreed.']