SZNAK v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 950

SZNAK v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 950

No special circumstances were established to justify extension of time; applicant's grounds of appeal had no prospects of success, including new bribery explanation. Tribunal complied with statutory duties and applied correct law. Application dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: SZNAK; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Citizenship; Second Respondent: Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal; Dismissed
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs awarded to first respondent.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Protection Visa, Credibility Findings, Jurisdictional Error
Administrative Law Migration Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Protection Visa Credibility Findings Jurisdictional Error

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SZNAK

Appellant

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

First Respondent

Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal; Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances justify extension of time to appeal
  2. 2 Whether Tribunal committed jurisdictional error in credibility determination
  3. 3 Whether Tribunal failed to consider corroborative evidence

Ratio Decidendi

No special circumstances were established to justify extension of time; applicant's grounds of appeal had no prospects of success, including new bribery explanation. Tribunal complied with statutory duties and applied correct law. Application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs awarded to first respondent.

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the first respondent's costs.