NARS v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 394

[2005] HCATrans 394

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S255 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

NARS

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GLEESON CJ
GUMMOW J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 16 JUNE 2005, AT 9.20 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GLEESON CJ:   The applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh.  He claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of political persecution.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal observed that the applicant had declined the opportunity to provide further information in support of his claims at an oral hearing or in writing when it had extended to him an invitation to do so.  The Tribunal considered the information before it to be inadequate to enable it to be satisfied of the necessary facts to substantiate the applicant’s claim to refugee status, and that the applicant’s failure to appear before it raised doubts as to the veracity of the information he had provided.  The Tribunal was unable to be satisfied on the material before it that the applicant had a well‑founded fear of persecution should he return to Bangladesh.

The applicant sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Court.  Beaumont J dismissed the application as demonstrating no basis for judicial review.  An appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court (Hill, Madgwick and Conti JJ) was dismissed in December 2003.

The application for special leave to appeal to this Court is brought well out of time. The necessary extension of time should not be granted because there are no prospects of success in the special leave application.

Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order refusing the application for an extension of time and dismissing the application with costs.

AT 9.22 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED