SZEQI v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Case [2006] FCAFC 94


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZEQI v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCAFC 94

SZEQI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

NSD 2516 OF 2005

TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ
22 MAY 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 2516 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZEQI
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGES:

TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

22 MAY 2006

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The appeal is 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 2516 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZEQI
APPELLANT

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT

JUDGES:

TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ

DATE:

22 MAY 2006

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

  1. In this matter there has been no appearance by the appellant and no explanation for any non-appearance.  On the documents that we have looked at, there has been notice given to the appellant of the hearing today at this time, and accordingly the Court dismisses the appeal with costs for want of appearance.

I certify that the preceding one (1) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Court.

Associate:

Dated:            16 June 2006

No appearance for the Appellant.
Counsel for the Respondent: S. A. Mason
Solicitor for the Respondent: Phillips Fox
Date of Hearing: 22 May 2006
Date of Judgment: 22 May 2006
Details
AGLC
SZEQI v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCAFC 94
Case
[2006] FCAFC 94
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Szeqi v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, the appellant, Szeqi, sought to appeal a decision made by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs concerning his visa application. The appellant, a Chinese national, had applied for a subclass 100 visa, which is a temporary visa allowing the holder to enter and remain in Australia for a specified period. The Minister's decision was to refuse the visa application, and the appellant sought judicial review of this decision.

The primary legal issues in this case were whether the Minister's decision was lawful and whether there was any error in the application of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) in refusing the visa application. The appellant argued that the Minister failed to consider relevant evidence and made an error in the application of the criteria set out in the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

The court found that the Minister's decision was lawful and that there was no error in the application of the Migration Act or the Migration Regulations. The court held that the Minister had considered all relevant evidence and that the criteria for the visa application were correctly applied. The court also found that the appellant had not demonstrated any error in the Minister's decision that would warrant the court intervening. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

The appeal is 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

TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: TAMBERLIN, GYLES AND COLLIER JJ

Full text does not contain this section.