NADD v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 72

[2005] HCATrans 072

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S24 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

NADD

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

McHUGH J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 3 MARCH 2005, AT 9.38 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

McHUGH J:   The Refugee Review Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution in India for various factual reasons.

The Federal Magistrates Court refused an application for judicial review on the ground that the applicant had not made out a case that the Tribunal was biased or had fallen into jurisdictional error. 

The Federal Court dismissed an appeal (the hearing of which the applicant failed to attend) on the grounds that neither the Tribunal nor the Federal Magistrates Court had erred. 

The application for special leave is pro forma in character.  It relies on Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal (2002) 190 ALR 601, but without any factual basis.

An appeal would have no prospects of success.

The application for special leave is dismissed with costs.

Pursuant to rule 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order that the application is dismissed with costs.

AT 9.38 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED