Applicant S1060-2003 v MIAC & Anor

Case

[2008] HCATrans 49

7 February 2007

No judgment structure available for this case.

[2008] HCATrans 049

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S262 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

APPLICANT S1060/2003

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

KIRBY J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 7 FEBRUARY 2008, AT 9.28 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HEYDON J:   The applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh.  The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the first respondent to refuse the applicant's application for a protection visa.  The applicant thereafter unsuccessfully sought judicial review, and unsuccessfully appealed against the dismissal of that application for judicial review. 

The applicant then lodged a further application to the Tribunal for review of the original delegate's decision.  The Tribunal rejected that application on the ground that it no longer had jurisdiction, since the Tribunal as originally constituted had discharged its functions of review. 

Turner FM summarily dismissed an application for judicial review.  The Federal Court of Australia (Ryan J) refused an application for leave to appeal. 

The documents filed in support of the applicant's application for special leave to appeal to this Court have not addressed the crucial question of whether the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction.  The application has no prospects of success and must be dismissed.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave.  I publish that disposition signed by Kirby J and myself.

AT 9.29 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED

Areas of Law

  • Administrative Law

  • Immigration

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Natural Justice

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Jurisdiction

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0