S413 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal

[2004] FCA 669

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

S413 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 669

S413 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR

N 2531 OF 2003

EMMETT J
9 FEBRUARY 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 2531 OF 2003

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

S413 OF 2003
APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

9 FEBRUARY 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

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

2.        The application for an order nisi be refused.

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	N 2531 OF 2003

ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

S413 OF 2003

APPLICANT

AND:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

EMMETT J

DATE:

9 FEBRUARY 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 18 July 2003 a draft order nisi supported by an affidavit was filed in the High Court of Australia.  The applicant sought constitutional writ relief in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) given on 1 February 2000.  By consent, Gummow J ordered on 25 November 2003 that the further proceedings in the application be remitted to this Court. 

2. The matter is therefore before this Court as an application for an order nisi.  The matter was listed for directions today.  The solicitor for the applicant indicated that it was necessary to file an application disclosing some basis for relief.  The reason why such an application was made is that the affidavit, on its face, discloses no basis upon which any relief can be granted. 

3. The appropriate course is to refuse an order nisi.  The respondents to the application seek costs.  The matter was remitted by consent without the question of refusal of an order nisi being raised and in the circumstances I consider it is appropriate not to make an order as to costs.

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:            3 June 2004

Solicitor for the Applicant:	Ward Maxwell & Co
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	9 February 2004
Date of Judgment:	9 February 2004