FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 452
SZBJZ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 270 OF 2007MOORE J
27 MARCH 2007
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 270 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZBJZ
ApplicantAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First RespondentREFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER:
27 MARCH 2007
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Leave to appeal be refused.
2.The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1000.
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 270 OF 2007
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZBJZ
ApplicantAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First RespondentREFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
JUDGE:
MOORE J
DATE:
27 MARCH 2007
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment of a Federal Magistrate, of 7 February 2007, dismissing as incompetent an application filed in the Federal Magistrates Court on 28 August 2006: see SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2007] FMCA 118. The application before the Federal Magistrate was an application for an order to show cause why a remedy should not be granted in respect of the Refugee Review Tribunal's decision dated 21 July 2003 and handed down on 14 August 2003 affirming the decision of the delegate of the first respondent not to grant a protection visa. The Federal Magistrate concluded, correctly, that the application was out of time and did not fall within the provision which permits limited extension of time: see s 477(1) and (2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). Accordingly, in my opinion, any appeal would be futile. I refuse leave to appeal and order the applicant to pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1000.
I also note that the proceedings in the Federal Magistrates Court and this Court occur against a background of litigation, in the Federal Magistrates Court, this Court and the High Court, in which the applicant has sought to challenge the Tribunal's decision: see SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 639, SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1329, SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] HCSTrans 397.
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Moore. Associate:
Dated: 2 April 2007
The Applicant appeared in person. Solicitor for the Respondent: Blake Dawson Waldron Date of Hearing: 27 March 2007 Date of Judgment: 27 March 2007
- AGLC
- SZBJZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 452
- Case
- [2007] FCA 452
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the Minister's refusal of the applicant's visa application was legally sound and whether the court should grant leave for the Minister to appeal the decision of the primary judge that found the Minister's decision to be unlawful. The court also needed to determine the appropriate costs to be awarded.
The court found that the Minister's decision to refuse the visa application was not legally flawed, as the Minister had acted within the bounds of the Migration Act. The court held that the primary judge had erred in finding that the Minister's decision was unlawful. Consequently, the court refused the Minister's application for leave to appeal and ordered that the applicant pay the first respondent's costs, which were fixed at $1000.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Leave to appeal be refused.
2. The applicant pay the first respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $1000.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: MOORE J
Full text does not contain this section.