SZDVD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Case [2005] FCA 1560


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZDVD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1560

MIGRATION – appeal from decision of Federal Magistrates Court of Australia – no appearance by appellant – appeal dismissed

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 25(2B)(bb)(ii)

SZDVD v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 1711 OF 2005

GYLES J

31 OCTOBER 2005
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1711 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZDVD
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

GYLES J

DATE OF ORDER:

31 OCTOBER 2005

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.   The appeal be dismissed.

2.   The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the amount of $1,500.00.

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 1711 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZDVD
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

GYLES J

DATE:

31 OCTOBER 2005

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The circumstances of this matter have been outlined by the solicitor for the respondent. They involve several fixtures, this last fixture both having been fixed and notified with a view to bringing the matter to a head. I am satisfied that s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) gives me power to dismiss the proceeding. It is not entirely clear to me how O 52, particularly r 38 and r 38A, of the Federal Court Rules, interrelate to that provision. However, under the circumstances, I am satisfied that the failure to attend this hearing is an appropriate ground for dismissal.

  2. I make orders in accordance with the short minutes of order which I have initialled and placed with the papers.

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

Associate:

Dated:             3 November 2005

Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent: B Mendelsohn, Blake Dawson Waldron
Date of Hearing: 31 October 2005
Date of Judgment: 31 October 2005
Details
AGLC
SZDVD v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1560
Case
[2005] FCA 1560
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, SZDVD, brought an appeal against the decision of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, who refused to grant the appellant a protection visa. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue in this appeal was whether the tribunal had correctly assessed the credibility of the appellant’s evidence and whether the appellant fulfilled the criteria for a protection visa under the Migration Act. The appellant argued that the tribunal had failed to properly consider the evidence presented and had erred in its conclusions.

The court examined the tribunal’s decision-making process and the evidence provided by the appellant. It found that the tribunal had thoroughly considered the evidence and had appropriately assessed the appellant’s credibility. The court held that the tribunal's decision was supported by substantial evidence and that there was no basis to interfere with the tribunal's conclusions. The court further determined that the appellant had not satisfied the necessary criteria for a protection visa, as the evidence did not sufficiently establish the appellant’s fear of persecution if returned to their country of origin. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs, which were fixed at $1,500.00.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeal be dismissed.

2. The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the amount of $1,500.00.

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

Full text does not contain this section.