SZTGL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 214

SZTGL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 214

No reasonably arguable case was disclosed by the grounds of appeal; the Tribunal's findings regarding the applicant's credibility and claim for protection visa were reasonably open and not infected by jurisdictional error; therefore, the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: SZTGL; First Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Second Respondent: Refugee Review Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Dismissal of Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection Visa, Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Credibility Assessment, Jurisdictional Error, Complementary Protection
Migration Protection Visa Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Credibility Assessment Jurisdictional Error Complementary Protection

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SZTGL

Applicant

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

First Respondent

Refugee Review Tribunal

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Dismissal of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether grounds of appeal disclose a reasonably arguable case to challenge the Federal Circuit Court's judgment affirming the Tribunal's refusal to grant a protection visa
  2. 2 Whether explanation for delay in filing the notice of appeal was acceptable

Ratio Decidendi

No reasonably arguable case was disclosed by the grounds of appeal; the Tribunal's findings regarding the applicant's credibility and claim for protection visa were reasonably open and not infected by jurisdictional error; therefore, the application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time and leave to appeal dismissed
  • Applicant to pay the first respondent's costs of and incidental to the application, to be taxed if not agreed