Younes v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2026] FCA 229

1. This is an application, today, to adjourn the hearing of an application for extension of time and, if granted, an appeal, which is listed to be heard by the Full Court comprising Moshinsky, myself, and Dowling JJ next week on 11 March 2026.
2. Yesterday, the Court received correspondence from the applicant's newly appointed solicitor, being Ms Milojkovic, of Milojkovic Visa and Migration Solicitors, requesting that the hearing next week be adjourned. The matter was listed before me today to hear that application. These reasons concern my decision to refuse to grant the adjournment.
3. Ms Milojkovic has informed me today, after obtaining instructions, that Mr Berg of counsel is available to appear for the applicant on 11 March 2026. Mr Berg has been involved with the applicant's case for some time. In an affidavit filed by the applicant's then solicitor, Marter Mamarot, affirmed on 30 April 2025, Ms Mamarot deposes to the fact that there were several reasons for the delay in lodging the notice of appeal, such that it was out of time. One of the matters that has been brought to my attention, though, is that Mr Berg is one of, at least, two counsel who have been involved, advising the applicant from as far back as, it appears, April 2025, with a third counsel having appeared for the applicant in the primary proceeding before Sharrif J.
4. I am not satisfied that there is any good reason that is being advanced as to why the hearing next week should be vacated. The application has already been the subject of an application to vacate, which was made by orders of Perry J on 18 November 2025, with the matter being relisted for 11 March 2026.
5. There has been no satisfactory explanation given to me today by the solicitor appearing on behalf of the applicant as to why this matter cannot proceed on 11 March 2026 in circumstances where Mr Berg is available and has been involved in this case on an ad hoc basis from at least April 2025.
6. In those circumstances, I am not satisfied that there will be any prejudice to the applicant if the adjournment is refused. For those reasons, the application to adjourn the hearing on 11 March 2026 is refused and costs will be reserved.

I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Anderson.