AZAEE v Minister for Immigration

[2014] FCCA 857

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AZAEE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2014] FCCA 857

Catchwords:
MIGRATION – Judicial review of decision of Migration Review Tribunal – no jurisdictional error alleged or found – application out of time – application for extension of time refused – application dismissed – no matter of principle.

Legislation:

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.477(2)

Applicant: AZAEE

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: ADG 276 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Simpson

Hearing date: 17 April 2014

Date of Last Submission: 17 April 2014

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 17 April 2014 (ex tempore)

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: In person

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr S McDonald

Solicitors for the Respondents: Sparke Helmore Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The application for an extension of time is dismissed.

2. The name of the first respondent be changed from Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to Minister for Immigration and Border Protection.

3. The applicant do pay the respondents’ costs fixed in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND AND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($5,800).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT ADELAIDE

ADG 276 of 2013

AZAEE

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Settled ex-tempore reasons)

1. I have before me an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. 

2. The application is faulty in that the application that was filed and served on the parties does not contain page 3 of the application.  Page 3 of the application is the page that includes, amongst other things, the grounds of the application.  In the circumstances, I have thought it appropriate to give the applicant a full opportunity to explain to the Court what his grounds of application are.  He has had very little to say on that topic but nothing that he has said indicates that he complains of a jurisdictional error.

3. The decision that the applicant complains of was made on 7 June 2013.  The date of receipt of the decision was 11 June 2013.  The application was filed on 13 September 2013 and was therefore well out of time.  It was some 63 days after the end of the 35 day period during which the application should have been filed. 

4. The applicant has not put forward any evidence as to why there was such a delay in filing his application.  It is urged upon me by counsel for the first respondent that I should not grant the extension of time.

5. Taking into account the length of time that the filing of the application was delayed and that the applicant has not been able to put to the Court any submission suggesting a jurisdictional error, I consider it appropriate to dismiss the application. 

6. I find that pursuant to s.477(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) that it is not in the interests of the administration of justice to make an order extending the time for the filing of the application in this case.

7. I make the orders to be found at the beginning of these reasons.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Simpson

Associate: 

Date:  29 April 2014