SZBQT v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2004] FCA 625

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZBQT v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

[2004] FCA 625

SZBQT v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
N 266 OF 2004

STONE J
17 MAY 2004
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 266 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZBQT APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	STONE J
DATE OF ORDER:	17 MAY 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	N 266 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	SZBQT APPELLANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	STONE J
DATE:	17 MAY 2004
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court dismissing an application made under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). In his notice of appeal, the appellant sets out three grounds which can be briefly summarised as alleging that the Tribunal: (a) failed to take into account relevant considerations; (b) refused to accept that the appellant has a well-founded fear of persecution; and (c) did not consider the application properly.

2. The appellant came to Australia in 1992 but did not apply for a protection visa until 2003.  The learned Federal Magistrate pointed out that very little detail about the appellant’s claims was to be found in the Tribunal's reasons for decision. His Honour commented at [9]:

   ‘In all probability this is because there are very few claims, particularly of any recent history, that are being made by the applicant.’

3. The Federal Magistrate held that the appellant had not been able to point to any legal error and that the findings made by the Tribunal were open to it on the facts that were presented.  In oral submissions made before me today, the appellant also raised only issues of fact that are peculiarly the province of the Tribunal. 

4. I agree with the Federal Magistrate's conclusions for the reasons that his Honour gave.  It follows that the application must be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Stone.

Associate:

Dated:             19 May 2004

Counsel for the Appellant:	The appellant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr S Lloyd
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor
Date of Hearing:	17 May 2004
Date of Judgment:	17 May 2004