Parikhan and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for reinstatement of a citizenship review application that had been dismissed for the applicant's non-appearance at a hearing. The applicant subsequently sought an extension of time to lodge their substantive application for review. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether to grant the reinstatement request and, if so, whether to grant an extension of time for the substantive application.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had provided a reasonable explanation for their non-appearance at the hearing, thereby justifying reinstatement, and, in relation to the extension of time application, whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant an extension. The Tribunal considered established principles for assessing extension of time applications, including the length of the delay, the explanation for the delay, the merits of the substantive application, any prejudice to the respondent or the public, and the availability of alternative avenues of relief.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided a reasonable justification for their non-appearance, as their delay in lodging the review application was primarily due to awaiting the outcome of pending criminal proceedings. This reason was accepted by the Tribunal, leading to the granting of the reinstatement request. Subsequently, the Tribunal considered the extension of time application, noting that the substantive application was filed almost a year out of time. While acknowledging the significant delay, the Tribunal indicated it would proceed to consider the merits of the extension of time application, having reinstated the matter.