FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SVNB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs
[2005] FCAFC 87SVNB v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
S 283 OF 2004
MARSHALL, MANSFIELD AND STONE JJ
18 MAY 2005
ADELAIDE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ADELAIDE DISTRICT REGISTRY
S 283 OF 2004
BETWEEN:
SVNB
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENTPETER KATSAMBANIS, MEMBER REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENTPRINCIPAL MEMBER, REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
THIRD RESPONDENTJUDGES:
MARSHALL, MANSFIELD AND STONE JJ
DATE OF ORDER:
18 MAY 2005
WHERE MADE:
ADELAIDE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for an extension of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal is dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the application.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ADELAIDE DISTRICT REGISTRY
S 283 OF 2004
BETWEEN:
SVNB
APPLICANTAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
FIRST RESPONDENTPETER KATSAMBANIS, MEMBER REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
SECOND RESPONDENTPRINCIPAL MEMBER, REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
THIRD RESPONDENT
JUDGES:
MARSHALL, MANSFIELD AND STONE JJ
DATE:
18 MAY 2005
PLACE:
ADELAIDE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT
Today the Court published its reasons for judgment in SVMB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCAFC 86. The applicant in this matter is the husband of the applicant in SVMB. Counsel for the parties in this matter accepted that the circumstances of this proceeding are indistinguishable from those in SVNB. Consequently the Court will make the same orders in this application as it did in SVMB for the reasons set out in that judgment.
I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justices Marshall, Mansfield and Stone. Associate:
Dated: 18 May 2005
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Ower Solicitor for the Applicant: Winters Counsel for the Respondents: Ms S Maharaj Solicitor for the Respondents: Sparke Helmore Date of Hearing: 18 May 2005 Date of Judgment: 18 May 2005
- AGLC
- SVNB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCAFC 87
- Case
- [2005] FCAFC 87
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established exceptional circumstances that would justify an extension of time. The court was required to consider the criteria for granting an extension and assess the evidence presented by the applicant. The court examined whether the applicant had acted with due diligence in preparing and lodging the appeal and whether there were any mitigating factors that could explain any delay.
The court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting an extension of time. The court noted that the applicant had been aware of the need to lodge an appeal for some time and had not taken timely action. The court held that the applicant had failed to meet the required standard of establishing exceptional circumstances and dismissed the application for an extension of time. Consequently, the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the application.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application for an extension of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal is dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the application.
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: MARSHALL, MANSFIELD AND STONE JJ
Full text does not contain this section.