SZUIH v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 829

SZUIH v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 829

The application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant did not appear despite evidence he had been notified of the hearing, and the draft appeal grounds had no prospects of success: the bias and failure-to-hear-evidence allegations were completely unfounded, and the asserted jurisdictional error was not identified.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court of Australia Hearing of Application From SZUIH V Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 1047
Outcome
Application for extension of time and leave to appeal dismissed with costs payable to the first respondent.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time and Leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'reinstatement of Dismissed Application' 'non Appearance' 'prospects of Success' 'costs' 'suppression or Non Publication Order']
['administrative Law' 'immigration Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['extension of Time and Leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'reinstatement of Dismissed Application' 'non Appearance' 'prospects of Success' 'costs' 'suppression or Non Publication Order']

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

Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Federal Court of Australia Hearing of Application From SZUIH V Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 1047

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time and leave to appeal from the Federal Circuit Court's refusal to reinstate his judicial review application." "Whether the applicant's draft grounds alleging bias, failure to hear evidence, and failure to identify jurisdictional error had prospects of success." 'Whether the application should be dismissed under r 35.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) after the applicant failed to appear.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time and leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant did not appear despite evidence he had been notified of the hearing, and the draft appeal grounds had no prospects of success: the bias and failure-to-hear-evidence allegations were completely unfounded, and the asserted jurisdictional error was not identified.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time and leave to appeal dismissed with costs payable to the first respondent.

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time and leave to appeal dated 24 April 2015 be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the said application." 'The name of the second respondent be amended to "Administrative Appeals Tribunal".' 'Until further order, the contents of Exhibit A not be...