FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NAOZ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1040
NAOZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 1300 of 2003
MOORE J
SYDNEY
18 SEPTEMBER 2003
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1300 OF 2003
BETWEEN:
NAOZ
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
18 SEPTEMBER 2003
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
- The application for extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal be dismissed.
- The applicant pay the respondent’s costs.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 1300 OF 2003
BETWEEN:
NAOZ
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE:
18 SEPTEMBER 2003
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(given ex tempore)
This is an application under O 52 r 15(5) for an extension of time in which to file and serve a notice of appeal against a judgment of Sackville J given on 29 July 2003. The application for extension of time was filed on 2 September 2003. The applicant is unrepresented. He said he wants time to gather together information and material designed to establish that he has a well-founded fear of persecution were he required to return to India. I indicated to him that that material is irrelevant in the proceedings in this Court.
I have read his Honour’s reasons for judgment and no arguable error is apparent to me. Indeed, the applicant does not assert that his Honour made any error. Any appeal is, in my opinion, doomed to fail. In those circumstances, the order I propose to make is an order dismissing the application for an extension of time.
I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the application.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. Associate:
Dated: 18 September 2003
The applicant appeared in person. Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 18 September 2003 Date of Judgment: 18 September 2003
- AGLC
- NAOZ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1040
- Case
- [2003] FCA 1040
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around whether the court should grant the applicant an extension of time to file and serve the notice of appeal, and if so, under what circumstances. The court had to consider the statutory provisions governing the time frame for appeals and the discretion available to the court to extend such time.
The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of time. It held that the statutory time frame for filing and serving a notice of appeal was mandatory and not subject to the court’s discretion to extend. Consequently, the application for an extension of time was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application for extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs.
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
Established by: MOORE J
Full text does not contain this section.