SZGYO v MIAC & Anor

[2008] HCATrans 22

[2008] HCATrans 022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S267 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

SZGYO

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIEFEL J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 6 FEBRUARY 2008, AT 9.36 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant, a citizen of the People's Republic of China, arrived in Australia on 14 November 2004.  On 16 February 2005 a delegate of the first respondent refused his application for a protection visa.  The Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") affirmed the delegate's decision on 27 June 2005.  That decision was set aside by the Federal Magistrates Court on 24 April 2006.  A differently constituted Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision on 29 August 2006.  The applicant claimed to fear persecution as a Falun Gong practitioner however the Tribunal found that the applicant was not a witness of truth.

Scarlett FM dismissed the applicant's application in the Federal Magistrates Court on 21 February 2007.  His Honour found that there had been no breach of natural justice and the Tribunal's credibility finding was a matter for the Tribunal.

Madgwick J dismissed the applicant's appeal to the Federal Court on 9 May 2007.  His Honour found that the Tribunal comprehensively disbelieved the applicant for the reasons it gave.  His Honour stated that he could detect no jurisdictional error in the decision.

The applicant has not advanced any question of law that would justify a grant of special leave to appeal, and no question of principle arises out of the Federal Court decision. The Tribunal's decision turned on the adverse view it took of the applicant's credibility, a view that was open to it on the material before it. There is no foundation to the claim of bias or that s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was breached. We see no reason to doubt the correctness of the decisions below.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.  I publish the disposition signed by Kiefel J and myself.

AT 9.38 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED