SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration

[2007] FMCA 1318

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZDLQ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2007] FMCA 1318

MIGRATION – RRT decision declining jurisdiction – second application to Tribunal after unsuccessful judicial review – application dismissed at first court date.

Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 (Cth), rr.44.12, 44.12(1)(a)
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

SZASP v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 771
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2007] HCATrans 136
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2006] FCA 1277
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 403
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCATrans 726
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 696
SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 947

Applicant: SZDLQ

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG2133 of 2007

Judgment of: Smith FM

Hearing date: 31 July 2007

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 31 July 2007

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Applicant in person

Counsel for the First Respondent: Ms D Attard

Solicitors for the Respondents: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

1. The application is dismissed under r.44.12 on the ground that it does not raise an arguable case for the relief claimed.

2. The applicant must pay the first respondent’s costs in the sum of $800. 

3. Direct that no further application for review of the decisions of the Refugee Review Tribunal handed down on 22 April 2004 or 18 June 2007, or for review of the decision of the delegate of the first respondent dated 11 June 2003 or for review of any other administrative decision or action by any person or tribunal relating to the application for a protection visa received on 25 March 2003, shall be accepted for filing without prior leave of the Court. 

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG2133 of 2007

SZDLQ

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(revised from transcript)

1. This is an application filed on 10 July 2007, which invokes this Court’s jurisdiction under s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”) in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) dated 15 June 2007. In that decision the Tribunal found that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain a second application for review of a decision of a delegate made on 11 June 2003, which refused to grant a protection visa to the applicant.

2. The Tribunal considered that it had already discharged its functions under the Act to review the delegate’s decision. The history which I shall recount below shows that it was plainly correct in that respect, and the present application has no reasonable prospects of establishing otherwise. It should be dismissed under r.44.12(1)(a). The applicant was put on notice prior to today’s listing that the Minister would seek this order, and I propose to make it.

3. The Tribunal previously entertained an application to review the delegate’s decision, and had affirmed it on 30 March 2004.  The applicant had then obtained judicial review of that decision. 

   
   

   I dismissed that application on 30 November 2004 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration [2004] FMCA 947). Conti J dismissed an appeal on 12 May 2005 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 696). Hayne and Callinan JJ refused special leave to appeal on 8 September 2005 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] HCATrans 726).

4. The applicant then commenced a second set of proceedings in this Court seeking review of the Tribunal’s decision.  That proceeding was dismissed as an abuse of process by Nicholls FM on 23 February 2006 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 403). Black CJ considered an application for leave and refused it on 1 August 2006 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2006] FCA 1277. His Honour said:

   4In those circumstances, the Federal Magistrate was quite correct in finding that the second attempt to challenge the Tribunal’s decision was simply not permissible and was an abuse of process of the Court. 

   The applicant sought special leave to appeal to the High Court, and this was refused by Hayne and Crennan JJ on 18 April 2007 (see SZDLQ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Anor [2007] HCATrans 136).

5. The applicant then followed a course which this Court has seen frequently in recent months, making a second application to the Tribunal to review the delegate’s decision and then commencing a third round of manifestly hopeless judicial review proceedings.  Moore J has recently characterised such proceedings as plainly abusive (see SZASP v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 771). His Honour suggested that the Minister should consider how litigants of the character of this applicant are being permitted to remain in Australia. I would endorse his Honour’s observations in that respect. All that I can do to try and stop the applicant continuing to bring abusive proceedings is to give a direction to the Registry, which will require leave before anything further can be filed in this Court.

I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Smith FM

Associate:  Lilian Khaw

Date:  15 August 2007