Applicant S1152/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Case [2007] FCA 1472

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant S1152/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1472

APPLICANT S1152/2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 1353 OF 2007

MOORE J
18 SEPTEMBER 2007
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1353 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S1152/2003
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:

MOORE J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 SEPTEMBER 2007

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1200.

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

NSD 1353 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S1152/2003
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:

MOORE J

DATE:

18 SEPTEMBER 2007

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. This is what purports to be a notice of appeal from a judgment of a Federal Magistrate of 28 June 2007: see Applicant S1152/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2007] FMCA 1536, which was almost certainly interlocutory. I will treat the matter as an application for leave to appeal.

  2. The applicant has not appeared at the hearing.  Having regard to the correspondence from the Court of 29 August 2007 and from the Australian Government Solicitor of 13 September 2007 addressed to the applicant at his address for service, I am satisfied that the applicant was aware that the matter was listed for hearing today.  The solicitor appearing for the Minister has sought that the application be dismissed on the basis that the applicant has not appeared.  I propose to order that the application be dismissed. I order that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $1200.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore.

Associate:

Dated:        25 September 2007

Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing: 18 September 2007
Date of Judgment: 18 September 2007
Details
AGLC
Applicant S1152/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1472
Case
[2007] FCA 1472
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant in this case sought leave to appeal a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to cancel their visa. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia. The applicant, who arrived in Australia as a refugee, had their visa cancelled on the grounds that they had been involved in serious criminal activity. The applicant argued that the decision to cancel their visa was not legally sound, as it failed to take into account the impact of the serious criminal activity on their refugee status.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the decision to cancel the applicant's visa was lawful and whether the decision-maker took into account all relevant considerations. The applicant argued that the decision was flawed because it failed to consider the impact of the serious criminal activity on their refugee status. The Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, on the other hand, argued that the decision was lawful and that all relevant considerations had been taken into account.

The court found that the decision to cancel the applicant's visa was lawful. The court held that the decision-maker was not required to consider the impact of the serious criminal activity on the applicant's refugee status, as this was not a relevant consideration in the decision-making process. The court further held that the decision-maker had considered all relevant matters and that the decision was not flawed. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the first respondent.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1200.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

MOORE J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: MOORE J

Full text does not contain this section.