Brown v HREOC & Anor

[2002] HCATrans 15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S46 of 2001

B e t w e e n -

DON PMW DAMBAGOLLA ARACHCHIGE

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

McHUGH J
GUMMOW J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON FRIDAY, 15 FEBRUARY 2002, AT 12.23 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR D. ARACHCHIGE appeared in person.

MR S.B. LLOYD:   I appear for the Minister, your Honours.  (instructed by the Australian Government Solicitor.

McHUGH J:   What is the position with the interpreter?  I understand you do not want this interpreter, is that so, Mr Arachchige?

THE INTERPRETER:   Yes, I mention, because I appeared for his preliminary inquiry.

McHUGH J:   Does he want you or does not want you?

THE INTERPRETER:   There is no one else to be…..I do not…..my appearance.

McHUGH J:   Very well. Then you will have to be sworn in.

UDAGE WICKRAMASENA, affirmed as interpreter:

McHUGH J:   Now, we have read your written submissions, Mr Arachchige.  What do you want to say, if anything, about them?

MR ARACHCHIGE (through interpreter):   I have nothing more to add.

McHUGH J:   Nothing more to add?

THE INTERPRETER:   Yes.

McHUGH J:   Yes, very well.  You understand that this Court only grants leave to appeal in special cases.  You understand that?  Yes.  Very well, sit down, thank you.  We do not need to hear you, Mr Lloyd.

The Court has considered the written submissions of the applicant in this matter.  He seeks special leave to appeal against the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court which dismissed his appeal against the decision of Justice Wilcox affirming a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal.  The Refugee Review Tribunal had affirmed a decision of the Ministerial delegate which refused an application for a protection visa by the applicant and his family members.

The Full Court correctly applied the relevant principles and there is no substance in the proposed grounds of appeal.  In particular, there was no constructive failure by the Refugee Review Tribunal to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon it.  Accordingly, special leave to appeal must be refused with costs.

AT 12.27 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED