IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY MICHAEL VAN THANH QUACH
[2016] HCASL 285
C9/2016
To grant the extension of time necessary to enable the application to proceed would be futile.
The proposed appeal enjoys insufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of leave to appeal.
Leave to appeal should be refused.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.
S M Kiefel
11 November 2016P A Keane
Details
- AGLC
- In the Matter of An Application for Leave to Appeal BY Michael Van Thanh Quach [2016] HCASL 285
- Case
- [2016] HCASL 285
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Michael Van Thanh Quach applied to the court for leave to appeal against a decision of the Federal Court of Australia. The primary matter concerned an application under the Migration Act 1958, which was dismissed by the Federal Court. The applicant sought to appeal against this dismissal to the High Court of Australia. The court was required to decide whether to grant leave for this appeal. This involved assessing both the procedural aspect of whether an extension of time was warranted and the substantive aspect of whether the proposed appeal had sufficient prospects of success to justify the grant of leave.
The court found that extending the time for the application would be futile as the Federal Court's decision was final and binding without the possibility of a successful appeal. Furthermore, the proposed appeal did not demonstrate sufficient prospects of success, as the arguments presented were unlikely to persuade the High Court to overturn the lower court's decision. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal should be refused.
The High Court held that granting leave to appeal would not serve any useful purpose and was therefore denied. The court ordered that the Registrar prepare, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision was made on the basis that the application did not meet the criteria for leave to appeal, both in terms of procedural timeliness and the merits of the case.
The court found that extending the time for the application would be futile as the Federal Court's decision was final and binding without the possibility of a successful appeal. Furthermore, the proposed appeal did not demonstrate sufficient prospects of success, as the arguments presented were unlikely to persuade the High Court to overturn the lower court's decision. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal should be refused.
The High Court held that granting leave to appeal would not serve any useful purpose and was therefore denied. The court ordered that the Registrar prepare, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application. This decision was made on the basis that the application did not meet the criteria for leave to appeal, both in terms of procedural timeliness and the merits of the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.