Pannu v MIAC & Anor

[2007] HCATrans 674

[2007] HCATrans 674

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S90 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

HARBIR KAUR PANNU

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

MIGRATION REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIEFEL J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2007, AT 9.32 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J: The applicant, a citizen of India, seeks special leave to appeal against the orders of a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia (Nicholson J) exercising the appellate jurisdiction of that Court. By those orders, Nicholson J dismissed the applicant's appeal against orders of the Federal Magistrates Court (Emmett FM) dismissing applications brought under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) and Pt 8, Div 2 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) with respect to a decision of the Migration Review Tribunal. The Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to cancel the applicant's Temporary Business Entry visa after the applicant was located working at a fast food outlet in breach of the conditions of her visa.

Because the applicant is unrepresented, the application falls to be dealt with under r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

The applicant's written submissions do not advance any question of law that would justify a grant of special leave to appeal.  The applicant was not denied procedural fairness.  We can see no error in the reasons of Emmett FM for rejecting the applicant's complaint that the Tribunal was obliged to provide an interpreter.  No jurisdictional error is identified in the Tribunal's decision.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. I publish the disposition signed by Justice Kiefel and myself.

AT 9.34 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED