NALK v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 270

[2005] HCATrans 270

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S361 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

NALK

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 WEDNESDAY, 27 APRIL 2005, AT 1.51 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

McHUGH J:   The Refugee Review Tribunal rejected the claim of the applicant, a Bangladeshi, for a protection visa on the ground that the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant’s political opinion gave rise to a well-founded fear of persecution, or that there was inadequate protection in Bangladesh from political enemies.

The Federal Magistrates Court held that the factual findings that the Tribunal reached were open to the Tribunal and that the Tribunal’s decision did not involve procedural unfairness or breaches of natural justice.

The Federal Court dismissed an appeal on the ground that the factual findings that the Tribunal reached were open to the Tribunal and that the Tribunal’s failure to adjourn the hearing did not involve any procedural unfairness.

The applicant’s special leave application complained of the Tribunal’s failure to take into account relevant considerations, error of law and procedural unfairness.  The applicant also relied on Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal (2002) 76 ALJR 966; 190 ALR 601, but did not demonstrate the necessary factual basis. There is no ground for doubting the correctness of the decision of the Federal Court.

An appeal would have no prospect of success.  The application must be dismissed.

Under the power conferred by rule 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing this application.  I publish our joint reasons.

AT 1.51 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED