FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
APPLICANT S1366 of 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N263 of 2004
JACOBSON J
4 MAY 2004
SYDNEY
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY |
N 263 of 2004 |
|
BETWEEN: |
APPLICANT S1366 of 2003 APPLICANT
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
|
|
JACOBSON J |
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
4 MAY 2004 |
|
WHERE MADE: |
SYDNEY |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The motion for an extension of time be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the motion as taxed or assessed or as agreed between the parties.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY |
N 263 of 2004 |
|
BETWEEN: |
APPLICANT S1366 of 2003 APPLICANT
|
|
AND: |
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
|
|
JUDGE: |
JACOBSON J |
|
DATE: |
4 MAY 2004 |
|
PLACE: |
SYDNEY |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 This one of eight motions under O 52 r 10(2)(b) of the Federal Court Rules for an extension of time to file an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of Emmett J given on 20 February 2004. The motion was filed on 1 March 2004, slightly outside the seven day limit fixed by the rules.
2 The relevant background to the proceedings, and the reasons why his Honour refused to make an order nisi are referred to in my judgment in Applicant S1198 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 577.
3 The applicant has filed an affidavit in support of his application for an extension of time. The affidavit appears to me to satisfactorily explain the short delay. The affidavit goes on to say that his Honour did not consider all the legal factors related to the application, and that further details would be forwarded shortly.
4 The applicant appeared before me in person this morning. His only submissions were that the Refugee Review Tribunal (the “RRT”) did not consider his country information and did not take the information into account.
5 As I said this morning, I do not sit on this application to review the merits of the decision of the RRT. Nothing has been put to me in the affidavit or in oral submissions to suggest that there is any doubt about the correctness of his Honour's judgment. I am satisfied that an extension of time to file an application for leave to appeal would be futile because there are no prospects of success on an application for leave to appeal.
6 Accordingly, the order I make is that the motion for an extension of time be dismissed. The order I will make as to costs is that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the motion as taxed or assessed or as agreed between the parties.
|
I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jacobson. |
Associate:
Date: 4 May 2004
|
Applicant self represented |
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondent: |
J D Harris SC |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Respondent: |
Australian Government Solicitor |
|
|
|
|
Date of Hearing: |
4 May 2004 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
4 May 2004 |
