Applicant S116-2003 v MIMIA & Anor

[2006] HCATrans 698

[2006] HCATrans 698

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S172 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

APPLICANT S116 OF 2003

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

HAYNE J
CRENNAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2006, AT 9.21 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HAYNE J:   The applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, seeks special leave to appeal against the orders of a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia (Young J) exercising the appellate jurisdiction of that Court.  By those orders, Young J ordered that the applicant’s appeal be treated as an application for leave to appeal from orders of the Federal Magistrates Court (Scarlett FM) but that the application for leave be dismissed with costs.  In the Federal Magistrates Court, Scarlett FM had dismissed the applicant’s application for an order nisi for constitutional writs and other relief directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal.  The Tribunal had affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.

The application for an order nisi was dismissed by Scarlett FM on the basis that the applicant did not make out a case on the merits and Young J concluded that there was no sufficient doubt about the correctness of that conclusion to warrant the grant of leave to appeal.  Both in the Federal Magistrates Court, and in the Federal Court, questions of possible abuse of process presented by the fact that the applicant had previously applied unsuccessfully to the Federal Court for relief directed to the Tribunal were raised, but neither Scarlett FM nor Young J formed any concluded view on those questions.

Because the applicant is unrepresented this application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the conclusions of Young J.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. I publish that disposition.

AT 9.23 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED