SZFFV & Anor v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 815

[2005] HCATrans 815

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S296 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

SZFFV

First Applicant

SZFFW

Second Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

HAYNE J
CALLINAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 6 OCTOBER 2005, AT 9.22 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HAYNE J:   The applicants are husband and wife and are Indian citizens whose application for a protection visa was refused by a delegate of the respondent.  The outcome of the wife’s application depends upon that of her husband.  An application for a review of that refusal was rejected by the Refugee Review Tribunal.  The applicants then applied unsuccessfully to a Federal Magistrate for a review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal.  After that, the applicants appealed to the Federal Court against the decision of the Federal Magistrate.  The appeal was heard by a single judge exercising the appellate jurisdiction of that Court, Branson J.  There, her Honour pointed out that the Tribunal had found that the male applicant who had claimed to fear persecution had not been harassed or harmed for a Convention reason in India and that he did not have any well-founded fear of persecution in that country.  In her reasons dismissing the applicants’ appeal, her Honour pointed out that the Federal Magistrate had been unable to identify any jurisdictional error on the part of the Tribunal and nor could she. 

The application to this Court is for special leave to appeal against the decision of the Federal Court.  An appeal would have no prospects of success.  There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Federal Court.  Accordingly, the application to this Court must be dismissed. 

Because the applicant is unrepresented, the application falls to be dealt with in accordance with rule 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004. Pursuant to rule 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application. I publish that disposition.

AT 9.24 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED