Background
Ayesha Hameed sought an extension of time and leave to appeal a Federal Circuit and Family Court (Division 2) decision refusing to reinstate her review of a registrar’s summary dismissal. The underlying proceedings concerned the refusal of her Student (Temporary) (Subclass 500) visa application. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal had affirmed the delegate’s refusal because Ms Hameed was not enrolled in a course of study, a mandatory visa criterion.
Ms Hameed filed her appeal application out of time. Her proposed grounds alleged that the primary judge had failed to exercise discretion and afford procedural fairness, including by not properly considering medical material and matters concerning her visa compliance, educational progression and intention to study.
The Federal Court listed the application for hearing on 17 August 2026. Ms Hameed, who had acknowledged the listing, emailed the Court shortly before the hearing saying she was unwell and unable to attend. She supplied no medical evidence or other material showing that she could not participate.
The Court’s Holding
Justice Bromwich dismissed both the extension-of-time application and the amended leave-to-appeal application under r 35.33(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), because Ms Hameed was absent when the matter was called for hearing. To the extent her email was an adjournment application, it was refused: the unsupported assertion that she was unwell did not establish a sufficient basis for non-attendance.
The Court also explained that the proposed appeal could not have succeeded in any event. A student visa applicant who is not enrolled in a course of study cannot satisfy the mandatory enrolment criterion, regardless of the reasons for the lack of enrolment. The primary judge’s conclusion that Ms Hameed had no reasonable excuse for her earlier non-attendance and no arguable prospects of success was comprehensive and sound. Ms Hameed was ordered to pay the Minister’s costs as assessed or agreed.
Key Takeaways
- An appeal application may be dismissed when the applicant does not attend the listed hearing.
- An unsupported claim of illness will not necessarily justify an adjournment.
- Failure to meet a mandatory student-visa criterion cannot be cured by explaining why the criterion was not met.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the procedural consequences of failing to attend a Federal Court hearing, particularly where no adequate evidence supports a last-minute request to defer the matter.
It also confirms the limited scope for judicial review challenges where the merits tribunal’s decision rests on an undisputed failure to satisfy a mandatory visa requirement.