Nast & Anor v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 272

[2005] HCATrans 272

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S385 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

NAST

First Applicant

NASU

Second 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 1.52 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, as the applicant failed to attend the hearing, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant’s account was accurate and that the applicant had a genuine fear of persecution.

The Federal Court held that the factual findings that the Tribunal reached were open to the Tribunal and that the Tribunal’s decision did not involve any error of law, procedural unfairness, actual bias or a consideration of irrelevant considerations.

The Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed an appeal on the ground that the Tribunal’s decision did not involve jurisdictional error.

The applicant’s special leave application complained of error of law, procedural unfairness and jurisdictional error.  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 are no grounds for doubting the correctness of the decision of the Full Court.

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

The title to the application filed in this Court has a second applicant who bears the initials (NASU) that were used in the Federal Court to describe the applicant’s infant daughter.  No separate submission or, for that matter, application was filed on behalf of the infant daughter.  Nor was any application, formal or informal, made to the Court to act on behalf of the infant daughter.  However, it is unnecessary to make any order concerning this matter.  We simply note its occurrence.

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 1.52 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED