MZXIW v Minister for Immigration

[2006] FMCA 1482

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MZXIW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2006] FMCA 1482

MIGRATION – Protection visa – Refugee Review Tribunal – whether jurisdictional error – summary dismissal – whether arguable case – failure to attend Tribunal hearing – Applicant’s failure to understand significance of completing response indicating that the Applicant did not wish to attend hearing – failure of applicant to contact interpreting service.

MZXIY v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 1481

Applicant: MZXIW

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File number: MLG 443 of 2006

Judgment of: McInnis FM

Hearing date: 28 July 2006

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 19 October 2006

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: In person

Counsel for the First Respondent: Ms K. Miller

Solicitors for the First Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

1. The application as amended be dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.10 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001.

2. The Applicant shall pay the First Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $2,500.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
MELBOURNE

MLG 443 of 2006

MZXIW

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This application is an application by the mother of Applicant MZXIY in a related judgment MZXIY v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 1481 (MZXIY).

2. I adopt and apply the reasoning in the judgment delivered by this court in relation to the son MZXIY of the Applicant.  The facts and circumstances in this application are almost identical to those in the other application and for reasons which are evident in the court's decision in that matter, it is appropriate that this application be likewise summarily dismissed with costs.

3. No further material was advanced for and on behalf of the Applicant in this application which disclosed any further or discrete issues which would persuade the court that in this application there is any or any proper basis upon which the Applicant could succeed.  Further, I am satisfied that in this application, as with the other application, there is no reasonable prospect of success and/or the application is frivolous or vexatious.

4. Appropriate affidavit material was provided by the First Respondent in relation to this application, and again that material was almost identical to the material provided in the other application of this Applicant's son, referred to as Applicant MZXIY.

5. Accordingly, apart from adopting and applying the reasoning in MZXIY, it is unnecessary to further consider this application.

I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of McInnis FM

Associate: 

Date:  19 October 2006