SZSKO v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 105

SZSKO v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 105

The applicant filed the application for leave to appeal approximately four months out of time and did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Federal Circuit Court decision was not shown to be attended by sufficient doubt, because the proposed grounds repeated matters already considered by the primary judge and disclosed no jurisdictional error, bias, or failure by the Tribunal to consider the applicant's claims. The application for an extension of time was therefore dismissed, and leave to appeal would in any event have been refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and for Leave to Appeal in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application From a Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of an Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'bias']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['protection Visa' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'complementary Protection' 'jurisdictional Error' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'adverse Credibility Findings' 'bias']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time and for Leave to Appeal in a Migration Matter / Federal Court Application From a Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of an Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court decision.' 'Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for filing the application approximately four months out of time.' "Whether the proposed appeal showed sufficient doubt in the primary judge's decision and whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused." 'Whether the grounds alleging failure to consider s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), bias, and jurisdictional error disclosed any error.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant filed the application for leave to appeal approximately four months out of time and did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Federal Circuit Court decision was not shown to be attended by sufficient doubt, because the proposed grounds repeated matters already considered by the primary judge and disclosed no jurisdictional error, bias, or failure by the Tribunal to consider the applicant's claims. The application for an extension of time was therefore dismissed, and leave to appeal would in any event have been refused.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' 'The Applicant pay the costs of the First Respondent.']