SZFDW v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 685

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZFDW v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 685

SZFDW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
NSD 510 OF 2005

GYLES J
13 MAY 2005
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 510 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	SZFDW APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE OF ORDER:	13 MAY 2005
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.   The application be dismissed. 

2.   The applicant pay the respondent's costs assessed at $500.

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 510 OF 2005

BETWEEN:	SZFDW APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE:	13 MAY 2005
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for leave to appeal from a judgment of Federal Magistrate Scarlett FM (SZFDW v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 409).

2. As the transcript will record, the applicant for leave does not appear.  He forwarded by fax shortly before the hearing what purports to be a faxed copy of a medical certificate which is entirely unhelpful.  It does not state any medical illness and I certainly do not accept the genuineness of it.

3. If this were a case where one could see some underlying possibility of success or merit, I may take a different view.  However, I have read the decision of the learned Federal Magistrate which includes a history of the actions taken by the applicant to challenge the failure of the delegate of the Minister to accord him a protection visa.  I do not need to set those out, they are in the judgment from which the appeal is brought and I have been referred to an affidavit on the Magistrate's file which would be the foundation of those findings. It is a very unsatisfactory history which properly led the learned Federal Magistrate in proceedings commenced nearly 16 months after earlier proceedings had been dismissed in the Federal Court to dismiss the proceeding as incompetent and to summarily dismiss it as an abuse of process and because it fails to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

4. In my opinion, there is no possibility of any successful appeal and, exercising all of the powers I have under the rules, the application is dismissed.  I order that the applicant pay the respondent's costs assessed at $500.

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

Associate:

Dated:             30 May 2005

Counsel for the Applicant:	The Applicant did not appear
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	13 May 2005
Date of Judgment:	13 May 2005