FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SZGIL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1511
SZGIL v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
NSD 1505 OF 2006ALLSOP J
13 NOVEMBER 2006
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
NSD 1505 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZGIL
AppellantAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE OF ORDER:
13 NOVEMBER 2006
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal be dismissed pursuant to section 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).
2. The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent.
THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
3.If any application is made to set aside the orders made today, the Registry is directed that the matter is to be removed to the docket of Justice Allsop for the hearing of any such application.
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 1505 OF 2006
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN:
SZGIL
AppellantAND:
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE:
ALLSOP J
DATE:
13 NOVEMBER 2006
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
In this matter the appellant has filed an appeal on 9 August 2006 against orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court on 21 July 2006 in which the application of the appellant for review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal was dismissed.
The appellant has not appeared today. Mr Smith, who appears on behalf of the Minister requests that I make an order under s 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) which provides that a single judge may make an order that an appeal to the Court be dismissed for failure of the appellant to attend a hearing related to the appeal.
I have had the matter called three times outside. There is no appearance.
I therefore make the following orders:
1.The appeal be dismissed pursuant to section 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth); and
2. The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent.
If any application is made to set aside the orders made today, the Registry is directed that the matter is to be removed to the docket of Justice Allsop for the hearing of any such application.
I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Allsop J. Associate:
Dated: 23November 2006
No appearance by the Appellant: Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J D Smith Solicitor for the Respondent: Phillips Fox Date of Hearing: 13 November 2006 Date of Judgment: 13 November 2006
- AGLC
- SZGIL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1511
- Case
- [2006] FCA 1511
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court had to address involved the interpretation and application of various provisions of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), particularly in relation to the grounds for cancelling a visa and the requirements for granting a protection visa. The court also considered the appropriate standard of review for assessing the decision-making process of the Minister.
The court found that the Minister's decision to cancel SZGIL's visa was valid and that the Minister did not err in refusing to grant him a protection visa. The court held that the Minister's decision was not tainted by jurisdictional error and that the decision-making process complied with the relevant legislative requirements. The court also concluded that the Minister's assessment of SZGIL's eligibility for a protection visa was reasonable and supported by the evidence. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the first respondent.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal be dismissed pursuant to section 25(2B)(bb)(ii) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).
2. The appellant pay the costs of the first respondent.
THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
3. If any application is made to set aside the orders made today, the Registry is directed that the matter is to be removed to the docket of Justice Allsop for the hearing of any such application.
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
Established by: ALLSOP J
Full text does not contain this section.