12 Dec 2022
The summons for extension of time was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide any acceptable explanation for the delay, would not engage with the court, and failed to demonstrate a real prospect of success in the intended appeal given the lack of arguable grounds in the underlying NRF/judicial review application.
13 Dec 2018
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the applicant did not apply promptly, failed to provide an adequate explanation or supporting evidence for the delay despite being served with notices, and the underlying judicial review application lacked merit such that it was not in the interests of justice to extend time.
18 Apr 2011
The Court held the Director's policy lawful: the Convention does not require claimants to be granted any particular immigration status or that processing must begin while claimants are lawfully present; what is required is that no person be returned until their Article 3 claim is finally determined according to high standards of fairness. The published policy is sufficiently flexible to permit prompt investigation and medical examination where necessary and does not unlawfully fetter the Director's discretion; accordingly the refusals and policy did not render the decisions unlawful in these…