SZTOJ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 126

SZTOJ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 126

The proposed appeal had no prospect of success because the applicant merely sought to re-agitate his review grounds and complained about the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings, which invited impermissible merits review. The Tribunal had considered the applicant's evidence and submissions thoroughly and carefully, no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal was perceived, and no appellable error by the primary judge was shown. There was therefore no utility in granting an extension of time for leave to appeal and no substantial injustice in refusing it.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal / Application in the Federal Court From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application to Reinstate Judicial Review Proceedings
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment' 'judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'jurisdictional Error' 'credibility Findings' 'protection Visa']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'federal Civil Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment' 'judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'jurisdictional Error' 'credibility Findings' 'protection Visa']

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 Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal / Application in the Federal Court From a Federal Circuit Court Decision Dismissing an Application to Reinstate Judicial Review Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to apply for leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court judgment.' 'Whether leave to appeal was required because the Federal Circuit Court judgment was interlocutory.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient merit, including whether the Tribunal made jurisdictional error or the primary judge made appellable error.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed appeal had no prospect of success because the applicant merely sought to re-agitate his review grounds and complained about the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings, which invited impermissible merits review. The Tribunal had considered the applicant's evidence and submissions thoroughly and carefully, no jurisdictional error by the Tribunal was perceived, and no appellable error by the primary judge was shown. There was therefore no utility in granting an extension of time for leave to appeal and no substantial injustice in refusing it.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs as agreed or taxed."]