FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Applicant S265 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2005] FCA 1733
APPLICANT S265 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 2053 of 2005
WILCOX J
23 NOVEMBER 2005
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 2053 of 2005
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
APPLICANT S265 OF 2003
APPLICANTAND:
AND:
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENTMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENTJUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE OF ORDER:
23 NOVEMBER 2005
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs fixed at $450.00.
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 2053 of 2005
ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
APPLICANT S265 OF 2003
APPLICANTAND:
AND:
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENTMINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
WILCOX J
DATE:
23 NOVEMBER 2005
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
WILCOX J:
This is an application for leave to appeal against refusal of an order nisi by Conti J.
A previous challenge to the Tribunal’s decision, given in April 1999, was dismissed by Whitlam J on 20 August 1999. His judgment was upheld by a Full Court on 18 February 2000. The applicant was represented by counsel before Whitlam J and by senior counsel before the Full Court.
This is clearly an attempt to relitigate the same subject matter as the previous proceeding.
I propose to dismiss the application for leave to appeal.
I will order the applicant to pay the respondent's costs fixed at $450.00.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Wilcox. Associate:
Dated: 30 November 2005
The Applicant appeared in person. Solicitor for the Respondents: Ms D Watson of Australian Government Solicitor Date of Hearing: 23 November 2005 Date of Judgment: 23 November 2005
- AGLC
- Applicant S265 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2005] FCA 1733
- Case
- [2005] FCA 1733
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In delivering its judgment, the Court examined the nature of the Tribunal's decision-making process and the standards of review applicable to such decisions. It was determined that the Tribunal's decision was not so unreasonable as to warrant an appeal, as the evidence and reasoning provided supported the conclusion that the applicant did not meet the criteria for refugee status. The Court also noted that there were no jurisdictional errors in the proceedings before the Tribunal. Consequently, the Court held that the application for leave to appeal should be dismissed.
As a result of the dismissal of the application, the Court ordered that the applicant pay the respondent's costs, which were fixed at $450. This outcome reinforces the principle that leave to appeal is not granted lightly and that the Tribunal's decisions are to be given significant deference unless there are clear grounds for questioning their reasonableness or legality.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs fixed at $450.00.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: WILCOX J
Full text does not contain this section.