SZVMF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 838

SZVMF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 838

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's grounds in the application for leave and draft notice of appeal were unparticularised, he declined to elaborate or make supporting submissions, and he did not discharge the onus of showing sufficient doubt as to the correctness of the Federal Circuit Court's decision or substantial injustice if leave were refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Migration Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of an Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa Refusal' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'credibility Findings' 'procedural Fairness' 'section 424 a Information']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law'] ['protection Visa Refusal' 'leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'credibility Findings' 'procedural Fairness' 'section 424 a Information']

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 Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Federal Circuit Court Dismissal of an Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Federal Circuit Court's interlocutory decision dismissing the judicial review application under r 44.12(1)(a) of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth)." "Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient doubt as to the correctness of the primary judge's decision and substantial injustice if leave were refused." "Whether the applicant's unparticularised grounds identified any legal error in the Tribunal's or Federal Circuit Court's decisions."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant's grounds in the application for leave and draft notice of appeal were unparticularised, he declined to elaborate or make supporting submissions, and he did not discharge the onus of showing sufficient doubt as to the correctness of the Federal Circuit Court's decision or substantial injustice if leave were refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

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