SZUFY v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 1266

SZUFY v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 1266

The application for an extension of time was refused because the applicant did not provide an adequate explanation for the delay and, more significantly, had no prospect of success on appeal. Leave to appeal from the interlocutory Federal Circuit Court order would not be granted because the applicant identified no appealable error and had no arguable case that the Tribunal's decision was vitiated by fraud, as he accepted that he actively participated in deceiving the Tribunal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Judgment of Federal Circuit Court / Application for Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Application for an extension of time for leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order' 'judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'fraud on Tribunal' 'protection Visa']
['migration' 'administrative Law' 'federal Court Procedure'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order' 'judicial Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision' 'fraud on Tribunal' '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 Appeal Judgment of Federal Circuit Court / Application for Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal From an Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for the applicant to file a Notice of Appeal from the Federal Circuit Court judgment.' 'Whether the applicant had any prospect of success on a substantive appeal where leave to appeal from an interlocutory order would be required.' "Whether the applicant had an arguable case that the Tribunal's decision was vitiated by fraud where he actively participated in the deception of the Tribunal."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time was refused because the applicant did not provide an adequate explanation for the delay and, more significantly, had no prospect of success on appeal. Leave to appeal from the interlocutory Federal Circuit Court order would not be granted because the applicant identified no appealable error and had no arguable case that the Tribunal's decision was vitiated by fraud, as he accepted that he actively participated in deceiving the Tribunal.

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time for leave to appeal refused; applicant ordered to pay the first respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time for leave to appeal is refused.' 'The applicant pay the costs of the first respondent.']