Applicant S132-2004 v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 462

[2005] HCATrans 462

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S111 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

APPLICANT S132/2004

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIRBY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON MONDAY, 1 AUGUST 2005, AT 2.50 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh who came to Australia in 1999.  He claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of political persecution.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal rejected the applicant’s factual claims due to significant inconsistencies in the applicant’s evidence.  The Tribunal was unable to be satisfied on the material before it that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution should he return to Bangladesh.

The matter has a long procedural history.  The applicant first applied to the Federal Court for review of the Tribunal’s decision.  Allsop J dismissed that application and gave detailed reasons for that decision.  An appeal to the Full Court was dismissed.  The applicant applied to this Court for special leave to appeal, which was refused on 12 March 2004.  The applicant then lodged in this Court an application for orders nisi for constitutional writs.  On 23 August 2004 the application was remitted by Heydon J to the Federal Court.  Madgwick J dismissed the application for orders nisi and the application for constitutional writs as revealing no arguable case of jurisdictional error by the Tribunal.  His Honour further noted that considerations of Anshun estoppel “would dictate beyond the possibility of any reasonable argument the denial of any relief now to the applicant”.  A purported notice of appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court was filed out of time.  On 28 February 2005, Jacobson J, treating the application as an application for an extension of time in which to file and serve an application for leave to appeal, dismissed the application summarily due to the applicant’s failure to attend the hearing.

In these circumstances there is no prospect of success in any appeal to this Court from the orders of Jacobson J.  The applicant’s written case raises no grounds to doubt the correctness of that decision.  Accordingly, the application for special leave to appeal is refused.

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 the disposition signed by Kirby J and myself.

AT 2.53 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED