21 May 2026
Refusal to extend time because there was a substantial unexplained delay and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success.
20 May 2026
The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant offered no valid reason for the four-day delay, the Court's decision had been properly sent to his last known address (deemed served) and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success given that the Board had reasonably found the non-refoulement claim unsubstantiated.
30 Apr 2026
The Court refused extension of time because the applicant had a substantial unexplained delay (over 1.5 months), failed to identify viable, particularised grounds of appeal or to demonstrate error in the Leave Decision, raised new complaints not ventilated below, and there was no prospect of success or prejudice to justify extending time; accordingly the summons to appeal was dismissed.
30 Apr 2026
Extension of time to appeal was refused because the delay (one year and ten days against a 14-day appeal period) was very inordinate, the applicant offered no adequate reason for the delay, and the intended appeal had no real prospect of success as it repeated factual complaints that are not reviewable absent error of law; granting an extension would cause prejudice and constitute abuse of process.
29 Apr 2026
Extension of time was refused because the three-day delay was not justified by the reasons given (public holidays are included in the 14-day period and lack of legal assistance is not a valid excuse), and the intended appeal had no reasonable prospect of success given the Board and Director concluded the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; accordingly the application for extension and the appeal were dismissed.
24 Apr 2026
Extension of time refused because the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay and, critically, has shown no prospect of success in the intended appeal as no grounds were identified; absence of merit is decisive against granting indulgence.
24 Apr 2026
Although the delay was short, the applicant's explanation for the delay was unsatisfactory and, critically, there was no prospect of success in the intended appeal; therefore an extension of time to appeal was refused.
22 Apr 2026
Although the applicant's short delay and explanation for late receipt of the order were accepted, he failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law or a reasonable prospect of success in the intended judicial review; accordingly the court refused to extend time to appeal and dismissed the summons.
22 Apr 2026
Extension of time refused because applicant offered inconsistent and implausible explanations for the delay, failed to specify any grounds for the intended appeal, and there was no reasonable prospect of success in the intended judicial review; accordingly the summons for extension was dismissed.
22 Apr 2026
Extension of time was denied because the applicant was over one month late, provided no valid reason to rebut deemed service or justify the delay, and the intended appeal had no realistic prospect of success as the non-refoulement claim was unsubstantiated; accordingly the application for extension and the appeal were dismissed.