Applicant S117 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

[2006] FCA 1495

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant S117 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1495

MIGRATION LAW – application for leave to appeal dismissed  

Applicant S117/2005 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2006] FMCA 1169 related

APPLICANT S117 OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 1647 OF 2006

GYLES J
1 NOVEMBER 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 1647 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S117 OF 2003
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE OF ORDER:	1 NOVEMBER 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the costs of the first respondent.

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 1647 OF 2006

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S117 OF 2003
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE:	1 NOVEMBER 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for leave to appeal from the decision given on 8 August 2006 by Barnes FM, who declined to make an order nisi on the basis that no arguable case had been established (Applicant S117/2005 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2006] FMCA 1169). The application for leave to appeal from that decision, and the affidavit in support, identified very general grounds of attack upon that decision, but do not tie those grounds back to any part of the reasons of the learned Federal Magistrate. Unsupported by such a reference, those grounds, in themselves, are quite meaningless.

2. I have explained the position to the applicant and he has, quite frankly, said that he is unable to follow the technical legal aspects of this matter.  What he is seeking is another tribunal to properly assess his factual claims, and he would like more time as well.  As I have indicated to him, the role of this Court is simply to correct errors in the approach of the Federal Magistrates Court, not to deal directly with the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal.

3. This matter has a long history, which I need not go into, but, as I have explained to the applicant, in the absence of his ability to raise an arguable ground of appeal from the learned Federal Magistrate’s decision, I am bound to dismiss his application, which I do.  The applicant is to pay the costs of the first respondent.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Gyles.

Associate: 

Dated:        14 November 2006

The Applicant appeared in person
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Mr J Wright of Sparke Helmore
The Second Respondent submitted

Date of Hearing:	1 November 2006
Date of Judgment:	1 November 2006