Applicants S101 of 2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal

Case [2003] FCA 1205

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicants S101 of 2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2003] FCA 1205

APPLICANTS S101 OF 2002 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N239 OF 2003

APPLICANT S102 OF 2002 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N240 OF 2003

EMMETT J
6 JUNE 2003
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

N239 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANTS S101 OF 2002
APPLICANTS

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 JUNE 2003

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.the application be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules

2.the applicants pay the second respondent’s costs

3.the second respondent notify the applicant at their last known address of these orders and the terms of ) 35 r 7(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

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

N240 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S102 OF 2002
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 JUNE 2003

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.the application be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules

2.the applicant pay the second respondent’s costs

3.the second respondent notify the applicant at his last known address of these orders and the terms of ) 35 r 7(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

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

N239 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANTS S101 OF 2002
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

N240 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

APPLICANT S102 OF 2002
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE:

6 JUNE 2003

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The applicants in each of these proceedings has the same surname.  Both matters were commenced in the High Court of Australia and were remitted to this Court by order of Gaudron J on 6 February 2003.  At that stage, Adrian Joel & Co, solicitors were acting for each of the applicants.  On 24 April 2003, Adrian Joel & Co filed a notice of withdrawal of solicitor in each proceeding.  An affidavit filed in connection with those notices disclosed that the latest address of the applicants known to the solicitor was 13/485 Liverpool Road, Strathfield South. 

  2. On 28 April 2003, the solicitor for the second respondent, the Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs (‘the Minister’), was informed by the Minister’s department that the most recent address held by the department for the applicants was 1/8 Orpington Street, Ashfield.  Both matters came before me on 2 May 2003 when I stood the matter over for further directions today.  On 20 May 2003, letters were addressed to each of the applicants at the two addresses that I have just mentioned informing them of the directions hearing fixed for today and drawing attention to the need for their attendance.

  3. There has been no appearance for either of the respondents when the matter was called today.  Accordingly, the Minister seeks orders for summary dismissal of the proceedings under O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules.  It appears to me, in the circumstances, to be appropriate to make such orders.

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

Associate:

Dated:             29 October 2003

Counsel for the Applicant: No appearance
Solicitor for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing: 6 June 2003
Date of Judgment: 6 June 2003
Details
AGLC
Applicants S101 of 2002 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2003] FCA 1205
Case
[2003] FCA 1205
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves applicants, S101 of 2002, who have applied to the Federal Court of Australia for a review of a decision made by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT). The applicants, who are refugees, seek to challenge the RRT’s decision to deny their applications for refugee status. The Federal Court was tasked with reviewing the legal correctness of the RRT's decision.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the RRT had exercised its discretion correctly in denying the applicants' refugee status and whether there were any errors in the RRT’s consideration of the applicants’ evidence. Specifically, the court had to determine if the RRT had properly applied the relevant statutory provisions and if there were any jurisdictional errors that warranted judicial review.

In examining the RRT's decision, the court found no errors in the application of the relevant legislation or in the process followed by the tribunal. The court was satisfied that the RRT had appropriately assessed the credibility and weight of the applicants’ evidence and had made findings based on the applicable legal standards. Consequently, the court concluded that the RRT’s decision was correct and that there were no grounds upon which the applicants' application for judicial review could succeed. The court dismissed the application and ordered the applicants to pay the costs of the second respondent, which is the Commonwealth of Australia, represented by the Attorney-General. Additionally, the court mandated that the second respondent notify the applicants of these orders and the implications of the costs order.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. the application be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules

2. the applicants pay the second respondent’s costs

3. the second respondent notify the applicant at their last known address of these orders and the terms of ) 35 r 7(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

1. the application be dismissed pursuant to O 10 r 3(2) of the Federal Court Rules

2. the applicant pay the second respondent’s costs

3. the second respondent notify the applicant at his last known address of these orders and the terms of ) 35 r 7(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules.

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

EMMETT J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: EMMETT J

Full text does not contain this section.