Zaburoni v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2)

The case of Zaburoni v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (No 2) involved the appellant, Mr. Zaburoni, making an interlocutory application to amend his notice of appeal. The appellant sought to raise an additional ground in his appeal against the decision of the respondent, the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, to cancel his visa and deport him. The matter was heard by the Federal Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court included whether it was expedient in the interests of justice to grant leave for the appellant to raise a new ground in his notice of appeal, whether the appellant provided an adequate explanation for the late raising of the proposed ground, and whether the proposed ground had sufficient merit to warrant the grant of leave. The court considered the circumstances where the appellant had voluntarily sought to be returned to his country of origin and the proposed ground relied on "private" harms of the type identified in Goundar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1203.

The court found that the appellant had not provided an adequate explanation for the delay in raising the proposed ground, as it could have been raised in the notice of appeal several months prior. The court also determined that the proposed ground did not have sufficient merit to warrant the grant of leave, particularly in light of the appellant's voluntary return to his country of origin and the nature of the proposed ground. As a result, the interlocutory application was dismissed with costs.

The final orders of the court included dismissing the interlocutory application filed on 8 December 2017 and requiring the appellant to pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application, as agreed or assessed. The entry of orders was dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.