SZTLH v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, SZTLH, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Refugee Review Tribunal (Tribunal) on 13 July 2012, which affirmed the Minister's refusal to grant him a protection visa. The application for judicial review was filed on 28 October 2013, more than 12 months after the Tribunal's decision. The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection was the first respondent, and the Refugee Review Tribunal was the second respondent. The matter came before Judge Driver of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant the applicant an extension of time to file his judicial review application, pursuant to section 477(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Subsidiary to this, the Court considered the grounds of the proposed judicial review, which alleged jurisdictional error by the Tribunal, specifically a breach of procedural fairness and section 425 of the *Migration Act* in relation to the applicant's fear of abduction, and an error in distinguishing between refugee and complementary protection criteria.

Judge Driver refused the application for an extension of time. His Honour reasoned that the applicant's extensive pursuit of ministerial intervention, while determined, did not constitute a sufficient explanation for the significant delay in seeking judicial review. Furthermore, even if a sufficient explanation for the delay had been provided, the Court found that the proposed grounds of judicial review lacked substance. The Court found no evidence of bias or a breach of section 425, nor any error in the Tribunal's consideration of refugee and complementary protection criteria. Consequently, the purported judicial review application was deemed incompetent.

The Court ordered that the applicant pay the first respondent's costs and disbursements incidental to the application, fixed at $2,000.