FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 853
Appeal from: Application for extension of time: J & K Bown Pty Ltd (Trustee) v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FedCFamC2G 262 File number(s): QUD 112 of 2022 Judgment of: DOWNES J Date of judgment: 22 July 2022 Catchwords: MIGRATION – application for extension of time to file notice of appeal pursuant to r 36.05 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – success of application depended on success of application in related proceedings, which application was dismissed – application dismissed Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 36.05 Cases cited: Division: General Division Registry: Queensland National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Number of paragraphs: 7 Date of hearing: 14 July 2022 Counsel for the Applicant: Mr J Merchant Solicitor for the Applicant: Pennisi Zia Lawyers Solicitor for the First Respondent: Ms E Tattersall of Sparke Helmore Lawyers Counsel for the Second Respondent: The Second Respondent did not appear ORDERS
QUD 112 of 2022 BETWEEN: GURDEEP SINGH
Applicant
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
DOWNES J
DATE OF ORDER:
22 JULY 2022
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The name of the first respondent be amended to “Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs”.
2.The application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is dismissed.
3.The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $4,000.00.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DOWNES J:
This is an application for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal which is brought pursuant to r 36.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).
By his proposed appeal, the applicant (Mr Singh) seeks to set aside orders of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) in J & K Bown Pty Ltd (Trustee) v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FedCFamC2G 262.
The hearing before this Court was conducted concurrently with the matter in QUD 107 of 2022 whereby the nominator entity, J & K Bown Pty Ltd ATF the Bown Family Trust (Company), also sought an extension of time.
Counsel for Mr Singh conceded that if the Company’s application for an extension of time failed, then his application would also fail.
In J & K Bown Pty Ltd as trustee for the Bown Family Trust v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 854, this Court dismissed the Company’s application for an extension of time.
It follows that Mr Singh’s application for extension of time should also be dismissed.
No submissions were made by Mr Singh against the orders sought by the first respondent relating to the change of its name and the proposed costs order. In this regard, the amount referred to in paragraph 31 of the first respondent’s submissions is adopted as being the appropriate amount to be fixed by way of costs – namely $4,000.00.
I certify that the preceding seven (7) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Downes.
Associate:
Dated: 22 July 2022
- AGLC
- Singh v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 853
- Case
- [2022] FCA 853
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the applicant had satisfied the criteria for an extension of time under rule 36.05 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). The applicant argued that the delay in filing the notice of appeal was due to the failure of the Minister to provide necessary information in a timely manner. The court noted that the success of the application for an extension of time depended on the outcome of a related proceeding, where the applicant sought a review of the decision to cancel his visa. The court dismissed the application in the related proceeding, and thus, the application for an extension of time was also dismissed.
The court held that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for an extension of time, as the delay was not caused by any fault of the respondent. The court also noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances that would warrant an extension of time. The court dismissed the application for an extension of time and ordered the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of $4,000.00. The court further ordered that the name of the first respondent be amended to “Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs”.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The name of the first respondent be amended to “Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs”.
2. The application for extension of time to file a notice of appeal is dismissed.
3. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $4,000.00.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.