S1752 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal

Case •

[2004] FCA 870

•

30 APRIL 2004

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

S1752 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 870

S1752 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N2382 OF 2003

S1756 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N2386 OF 2003

S1056 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N2693 OF 2003

EMMETT J
30 APRIL 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

N2382 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1752 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

30 APRIL 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court Rules does not apply. 

2.        The application for an order nisi be refused. 

3.        The applicant pay the Minister’s costs of the proceedings.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

N2386 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1756 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

30 APRIL 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court Rules does not apply. 

2.        The application for an order nisi be refused. 

3.        The applicant pay the Minister’s costs of the proceedings.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

N2693 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1056 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

30 APRIL 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        Order 51A rule 5(1) of the Federal Court Rules does not apply. 

2.        The application for an order nisi be refused. 

3.        The applicant pay the Minister’s costs of the proceedings.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

N2382 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1752 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

N2386 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1756 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

N2693 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

S1056 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE:

30 APRIL 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. Proceeding numbers N2382 of 2003, N2386 of 2003 and N2693 of 2003 were commenced in the High Court of Australia in May 2003, by the filing of an affidavit by the solicitor for the applicant, Mr Jyoti Bharati, together with a draft order nisi.  The affidavit annexes copies of a decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs (‘the Minister’) and the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) refusing and confirming the decision to refuse protection visas.

  2. The affidavit discloses no evidence to support any of the relief claimed in the draft order nisi.  Following remitter of the proceedings to this Court, no further step has been taken by the applicants to endeavour to demonstrate a cause of action.  Each of the matters is before me for callover today.  Mr Bharati indicated that he required further time to get instructions.  He was unable to indicate what would happen during that time or the nature of any evidence that was likely to be filed.

  3. The Minister asks that the application for order nisi be dealt with today.  In the circumstances, I consider it is appropriate to accede to the Minister’s request. 

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.

Associate:

Dated:            5 July 2004

Solicitor for the Applicant: Jyoti Bharati
Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing: 30 April 2004
Date of Judgment: 30 April 2004
Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0