SZAHN v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 401

[2005] HCATrans 401

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S316 of 2004

B e t w e e n -

SZAHN

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GLEESON CJ
GUMMOW J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 16 JUNE 2005, AT 9.30 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GLEESON CJ:   The applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh who claims to be entitled to refugee status by reason of political persecution.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal considered that significant elements of the applicant’s claims were unsubstantiated, and disbelieved some particular claims that the applicant had experienced violence in Bangladesh.  As a result, the Tribunal was not satisfied that there was a real chance that he would experience persecution for a Convention reason should he return to Bangladesh. 

The applicant sought review of the Tribunal’s decision by the Federal Magistrates Court.  That Court dismissed that application because no jurisdictional error in the decision of the Tribunal had been shown.  An appeal to the Federal Court (Wilcox J) was dismissed.

Both the Federal Magistrate and Wilcox J noted that the applicant’s grounds of review and appeal were vague and not particularised.  Their Honours each explained that it is not the role of a court in judicial review proceedings to reconsider the merits of a claim that had been rejected by the Tribunal.

The applicant’s written case appears to be a pro forma document.  It refers to Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal (2002) 76 ALJR 966; 190 ALR 601, a decision which bears no relevance to the facts of this case. Other similarly vague reasons are advanced.

There are insufficient prospects of success in any appeal to this Court from the Federal Court to warrant a grant of special leave.  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.

AT 9.32 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED