DPZ17 v Minister for Immigration

[2018] FCCA 682

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DPZ17 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2018] FCCA 682

Catchwords:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Applicant seeking to read affidavit including further material going to the genuineness of the applicant’s relationship – Court found material in the affidavit irrelevant – affidavit rejected.

Applicant: DPZ17

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

Second Respondent: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 2544 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Street

Hearing date: 21 March 2018

Date of Last Submission: 21 March 2018

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 21 March 2018

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant appeared in person.

Solicitor for the Respondents: Mr J McGovern
Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. The affidavit dated 19 December 2017 is rejected as irrelevant.

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 2544 of 2017

DPZ17

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION

First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant seeks to have read an affidavit dated 14 December 2017 which was filed on 19 December 2017, which includes further material going to the genuineness of the applicant’s relationship. The applicant identified that some of the material was new material and that some of the material was material that was before the Tribunal. The new material the applicant identified included photographs in relation to the wedding which the applicant contended had been provided to the agent, who had subsequently, not provided them to the Tribunal. The applicant also contends that the documents were sent by the agent to the Tribunal. 

2. The Tribunal’s reasons in relation to the “Nature of the Household”, referred to some photographs provided which were undated and uncaptioned and showed the parties together. The Tribunal found these photographs were not in a social setting. The Tribunal referred to having considered the photographs and oral statements and gave them little weight in relation to the social aspects. The Tribunal also referred to the parties having provided some wedding photos in the course of its reasons in respect of “Social Aspects of the Relationship”.

3. Whilst there may be further material that the applicant wanted to provide to the Tribunal, on the face of the Tribunal’s reasons, the Tribunal did have wedding photos that had been provided to the Tribunal in support of the alleged relationship and took the same into account. I accept the first respondent’s submission that the material in the affidavit is not relevant. Matters not before the Tribunal are not able to be taken into account to establish any jurisdictional error. Further, the affidavit does not establish that there was material provided to the Tribunal that was not taken into account.

4. Accordingly, the affidavit is rejected. 

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Street

Associate: 

Date:  10 April 2018