Applicant S209-2003 v MIMA & Anor

[2007] HCATrans 533

[2007] HCATrans 533

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S15 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

APPLICANT S209 OF 2003

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 6 SEPTEMBER 2007, AT 9.27 AM  

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh. On 22 September 1998 he applied for a protection visa. On 9 November 1998 a delegate of the first respondent refused the application. The applicant claimed to be an active member of the BNP; to have been attacked; and to have had false charges laid against him by members of the Awami League. He relied, inter alia, on a document purporting to be a letter signed by a BNP parliamentarian that indicated that the applicant was an active member of the BNP.

On 5 June 2000, the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) refused the application for review of the delegate’s decision. It found significant inconsistencies in the applicant’s statements and expressed doubts about the authenticity of the documentary evidence relied on by the applicant.

The applicant then applied to this Court for the grant of constitutional writs. On 25 November 2002 Gaudron J remitted the application to the Federal Court.

Before the Federal Court, the applicant claimed that the Tribunal failed to accord him procedural fairness by failing to warn him that it was considering finding that the letter, among other documents, was a forgery. Edmonds J dismissed the application on 27 February 2006 as his Honour found that the Tribunal refrained from making a finding that the letter was fraudulent in the sense that it was not authentic. Rather, the Tribunal found that the contents of the letter were constructed in such a way as to support the applicant’s claims. Edmonds J further held that there was no breach of s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

The applicant advanced the same arguments before the Full Court of the Federal Court. Ryan, Dowsett and Rares JJ dismissed the appeal on 13 December 2006. While there was some disagreement in the Full Court about how the Tribunal’s reasoning with respect to the letter should be construed, their Honours held that the Tribunal did not deny the applicant procedural fairness, and did not breach s 424A of the Migration Act.

The applicant’s case before this Court discloses no point of law that would justify a grant of special leave. Accordingly, there are insufficient prospects of success on any appeal to this Court. Special leave 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 Justice Heydon and myself.

AT 9.29 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED