SZATD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Case [2004] FCA 1559


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZATD v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1559

SZATD v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

NSD 1434 of 2004

WHITLAM J
23 NOVEMBER 2004
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1434 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZATD
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

WHITLAM J

DATE OF ORDER:

23 NOVEMBER 2004

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed with costs.

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

NSD 1434 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZATD
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

WHITLAM J

DATE:

23 NOVEMBER 2004

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court dismissing an application under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 for relief in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’): SZATD v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FMCA 586. The Tribunal’s decision, which was handed down on 14 October 2003, affirmed a decision of the respondent’s delegate refusing to grant the appellant a protection visa.

  2. The appellant has not attended at the appointed time for the hearing today. Pursuant to s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 I order that the appeal be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Whitlam.

Associate:

Dated:            1 December 2004

No appearance by the appellant

Counsel for the Respondent:

R J Bromwich

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Ms K Alexander from the Australian Government Solicitor

Date of Hearing:

23 November 2004

Date of Judgment:

23 November 2004

Details
AGLC
SZATD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1559
Case
[2004] FCA 1559
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Court of Australia heard an appeal brought by SZATD, an individual from Hungary, against the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. The appeal was in response to a decision made by the Minister to cancel SZATD's visa on the grounds of non-compliance with visa conditions. The visa was initially issued on a temporary basis, with strict conditions that required SZATD to remain in a specific location and not engage in employment without prior approval.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Minister had correctly exercised his discretion to cancel SZATD's visa. SZATD argued that the Minister had erred in law by failing to consider relevant factors and by not providing adequate reasons for the decision. SZATD also contended that the decision was harsh and unreasonable. The Minister, on the other hand, maintained that the decision was well within the statutory powers granted and was supported by the evidence presented.

The court found that the Minister had exercised his discretion correctly and had provided adequate reasons for the decision. The court held that the decision was not harsh or unreasonable, as it was based on clear evidence of visa condition breaches. The court further determined that the Minister had considered all relevant factors and that SZATD had not demonstrated any error of law that would warrant interference by the court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the Minister.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeal be dismissed with costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

WHITLAM J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: WHITLAM J

Full text does not contain this section.