NAOI v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 87

[2005] HCATrans 087

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S169 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

NAOI

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 9.42 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

McHUGH J:   The applicant is a Bangladeshi.  His claim to a well-founded fear of persecution on religious and political grounds was rejected by the Refugee Review Tribunal for various factual reasons.

The Federal Magistrates Court refused judicial review because it could find no jurisdictional error. 

The Federal Court (Tamberlin J) dismissed an appeal.  It rejected contentions that the applicant had been denied procedural fairness by reason of particular issues not being raised, that there was no evidence for some of the Tribunal's findings, that the Tribunal had not considered the evidence cumulatively, and that the Tribunal had misdirected itself as to the meaning of "harm".

The primary complaints in the applicant's special leave application are that the question of whether it was reasonable for him to avoid persecution by relocating to Dhaka was not sufficiently raised with him, and that there was no evidence supporting the Tribunal's conclusion that it was reasonable for him to relocate. 

Tamberlin J's summary of the evidence about the raising of the issue was not challenged.  If that summary is correct, the issue was sufficiently raised.  Further, there appears to have been some evidence to support the Tribunal's findings.

There are insufficient prospects of success to justify a grant of special leave.

The application 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 9.42 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED