SZMMT v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 149
The applicant did not provide satisfactory reasons for delay, and the grounds of the draft notice of appeal lacked merit. The Tribunal followed proper procedures under the Migration Act 1958, and no jurisdictional error was established. Accordingly, no special reasons existed to grant an extension of time to appeal.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 February 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
- Outcome
- Application for extension of time dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['judicial Review' 'protection Visas' 'extension of Time' 'tribunal Procedure']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether special reasons exist for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal' 'Whether the Tribunal breached procedural requirements under Migration Act 1958 ss 424A and 424B' 'Whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by adverse credibility findings']
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant did not provide satisfactory reasons for delay, and the grounds of the draft notice of appeal lacked merit. The Tribunal followed proper procedures under the Migration Act 1958, and no jurisdictional error was established. Accordingly, no special reasons existed to grant an extension of time to appeal.
Court Disposition
Application for extension of time dismissed
Orders
- ['The application for an extension of time in which to file and serve a Notice of Appeal from the judgement of the Federal Magistrate be dismissed.' 'The Applicant pay the costs of the First Respondent.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment