De Costa v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

[2001] FCA 723

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

De Costa v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 723

WEERATHUNGA ARACHCHIGE PULASTHIL K DE COSTA V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

N 317 OF 2001

MOORE J
6 JUNE 2001
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N317 OF 2001

BETWEEN:	WEERATHUNGA ARACHCHIGE PULASTHIL K DE COSTA FIRST APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:	6 JUNE 2001
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS AND DIRECTS THAT:

1.The application is dismissed.

2.The applicants pay the respondent's costs.

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	N 317 OF 2001

BETWEEN:	WEERATHUNGA ARACHCHIGE PULASTHIL K DE COSTA APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	MOORE J
DATE:	6 JUNE 2001
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

MOORE J

1. This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal of 19 March 2001 affirming a decision not to grant a protection visa to the applicant.  The applicant is a Sri Lankan national of Sinhalese ethnicity who arrived in Australian on 10 November 2000.  The application for judicial review contained no details concerning the grounds upon which the review was sought.  I have invited the applicant who is unrepresented to identify reviewable errors in the decision of the Tribunal but nothing was said that suggests to me any error is raised by the applicant.

2. I have read the decision of the Tribunal and, in substance, the Tribunal rejected as implausible the account the applicant gave of his experiences in Sri Lanka that were said to give rise to his well-founded fear of persecution.  The applicant's account revolved around his friendship with a young Tamil who was a customer at a shop at which the applicant worked.  It was as a result of that friendship, on the applicant's account, that the applicant was arrested, detained, interrogated and tortured.  None of this was accepted by the Tribunal.

3. There is nothing apparent in the Tribunal’s reasons that suggest to me any reviewable error arose from the way in which it dealt with the applicant's claims.  Accordingly, I order that the application for judicial review is dismissed and the applicant pay the respondent's costs.

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

Associate:

Dated:             13 June 2001

The Applicant appeared in person

Counsel for the Respondent:	Geoffrey Kennett
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	6 June 2001
Date of Judgment:	6 June 2001