NAUK v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 806

[2005] HCATrans 806

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S194 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

NAUK

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIRBY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 6 OCTOBER 2005, AT 9.43 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant is a citizen of India.  He claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution on grounds of his religion and political opinions.  In particular, the applicant claims that, as a member of the Majlis Bacho Thareek Political Organisation and a Muslim, he had been mistreated and harassed by the Baharti Janta Party.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal made adverse findings in respect of the applicant’s credibility, noting various inconsistencies in different versions of his accounts of attacks upon his person.  During the hearing, the applicant requested an extension of time in which to provide documentary evidence in support of his claims.  That extension was granted.  Upon request by the applicant, a further two extensions were granted, at the end of which time the applicant sought another extension of 28 days.  In responding to that request, the Tribunal granted the applicant an extension of seven days.

The applicant sought review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Magistrates Court.  The Court dismissed his application on the basis that the applicant had been given a reasonable opportunity to present his case and that the Tribunal’s granting of the seven-day extension did not amount to a jurisdictional error.  An appeal to the Federal Court (Conti J) was dismissed.  His Honour found that nothing resembling jurisdictional error was identified by the applicant.

We have reviewed the applicant’s written case and the decisions of the Tribunal, the Federal Magistrates Court and the Federal Court.  There are no prospects of success in any appeal to this Court from the decision of Conti J.  Accordingly, special leave to appeal is refused. 

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing this application for special leave.  I publish the disposition signed by Kirby J and myself.

AT 9.45 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED