SZAAD v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 803

[2005] HCATrans 803

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S195 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

SZAAD

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 9.37 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant is a citizen of India.  He arrived in Australia in October 2000 and claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution.  In particular, the applicant claims that, after having informed the police in Punjab of his suspicions that his nephew was a terrorist working for a pro‑Khalistan organisation, he was detained and mistreated by the police.  He now claims to fear harm either at the hands of his nephew or at the hands of the Punjab police.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal found that the applicant’s fears in respect of his nephew did not constitute fear of persecution for a Convention reason, but rather a fear of harm sought to be exacted for the reason of personal revenge.  The Tribunal was also satisfied that the applicant had long since ceased to be a person of interest to the police in Punjab.

The applicant sought review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Magistrates Court.  An order that his application be dismissed was made by consent.  Two years later, the applicant sought in the Federal Court (Hely J) leave to appeal from that order and an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal.  There was no explanation of that delay.  The application was dismissed as an abuse of the process of the Court. 

We have reviewed the applicant’s written case and the decisions of the Tribunal, the Federal Magistrates Court and the Federal Court.  No question appropriate to the grant of special leave to appeal from the decision of Hely J arises in the present case.  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 9.39 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED