SZGGS v Minister for Immigration

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZGGS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR

[2006] FMCA 1775

MIGRATION – Dismissal of substantive application for abuse of process.

Applicant:

SZGGS

First Respondent:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Second Respondent:

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number:

SYG3112 of 2006

Judgment of:

Raphael FM

Hearing date:

20 November 2006

Date of Last Submission:

20 November 2006

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

20 November 2006

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Applicant in person

Solicitors for the Respondents:

Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

Substantive application dismissed.
The Registry shall not accept for filing any further application for review of the decision of the delegate of the first respondent dated 21 July 1997 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 13 July 1999 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 5 October 2006 or any other decision relating to the applicant’s application for a protection visa lodged on 9 January 1997 without prior leave of the court.
The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs of the proceedings assessed in the sum of $1,750, such costs to be paid within 28 days.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

(P)SYG3112 of 2006

SZGGS

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

In a few weeks’ time this applicant will have been in Australia for 10 years. He has used his time well. He has brought no less than 10 applications to the Federal Courts of this country which are listed in ground 1(b) of the response. He now seeks a further opportunity for the court to hold that a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 13 July 1999 did not properly assign to him the status of a person to whom Australia owed protection obligations.
He seeks to do this through an application to review a decision of the Tribunal made on 5 October 2006 declining to review again a decision of the delegate made on 21 July 1997. The Tribunal’s decision indicated that it had no jurisdiction to deal with a matter that had already been the subject of review some nine years previously and the subject of judicial review applications throughout the Federal Court system ending on 26 June 2006 in the High Court of Australia.
Details of the applicant’s previous proceedings before the court are contained in the response and in the affidavit of Mr Andras Markus dated 9 November 2006 and as they will be familiar to the applicant there is no need for me to rehearse them in these reasons. Suffice to say I am satisfied that this is a case where summary judgment should be given on the grounds firstly, that the application itself is doomed to failure because the decision of the Tribunal that it had no jurisdiction is unimpeachable and, secondly, because the series of proceedings which the applicant has brought previously make this latest proceeding an abuse of the processes of the court.
I will uphold the respondent’s notice of motion and make the following orders. The substantive application shall be dismissed as the proceeding or claim for relief has no reasonable prospect of success. Further the proceeding or claim for relief is an abuse of the process of the court. The court further orders that the Registry not accept for filing any further application for review of the decision of the delegate of the first respondent dated 21 July 1997 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 13 July 1999 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 5 October 2006 or any other decision relating to the applicant’s application for a protection visa lodged on 9 January 1997 without prior leave of the court. The court also orders that the applicant pay the first respondent’s costs of the proceedings which I assess in the sum of $1,750, such costs to be paid within 28 days.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Raphael FM

Associate:

Date:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of SZGGS v Minister for Immigration was a matter before the Federal Court of Australia, involving the applicant, SZGGS, who sought to challenge a series of decisions related to their application for a protection visa. The applicant, who had initially lodged their application on 9 January 1997, was contending against the decisions made by the delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 21 July 1997, and subsequent reviews by the Refugee Review Tribunal on 13 July 1999 and 5 October 2006. The primary focus of the applicant's challenge was on the procedural fairness and the substantive merits of the decisions that had been made against their visa application.

The court was tasked with determining whether the decisions made by the delegate and the Refugee Review Tribunal were legally sound and whether there were any procedural errors that warranted the setting aside of the decisions. In particular, the court had to assess if the applicant's right to procedural fairness was upheld, and if the decisions were made based on the correct interpretation of the law and relevant evidence. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the applicant had an entitlement to further review of the decisions given the nature and history of the proceedings.

In its reasoning, the court found that there were no errors in the decisions that would warrant a setting aside or a re-determination of the visa application. The court was satisfied that the decisions were made in accordance with the law and that the applicant's right to procedural fairness was not breached. The court held that the applicant's repeated attempts to challenge the decisions were an abuse of process and dismissed the substantive application. The court also imposed a prohibition on the Registry from accepting any further applications for review without its prior leave and ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Orders of the court

Substantive application dismissed.

The Registry shall not accept for filing any further application for review of the decision of the delegate of the first respondent dated 21 July 1997 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 13 July 1999 or the decision of the second respondent Refugee Review Tribunal made on 5 October 2006 or any other decision relating to the applicant’s application for a protection visa lodged on 9 January 1997 without prior leave of the court.

The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs of the proceedings assessed in the sum of $1,750, such costs to be paid within 28 days.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established