SZIZJ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2007] FCA 1334

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZIZJ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 1334

SZIZJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND & ANOR
NSD 1014 OF 2007

MADGWICK J
13 AUGUST 2007
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 1014 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

SZIZJ
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

& ANOR
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MADGWICK J
DATE OF ORDER:	13 AUGUST 2007
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed.

2.The appellant pay the first respondent’s costs of the appeal assessed in the sum of $2,500.00.

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 1014 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

SZIZJ
Applicant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

& ANOR
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	MADGWICK J
DATE:	13 AUGUST 2007
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Magistrates Court given by Scarlett FM. 

2. The grounds of appeal set out in the notice of appeal are, as counsel for the minister says, in “template” form.  This means, in part, that they refer to cases that can have nothing whatever to do with this case, though otherwise they are generalised and are, generally speaking, quite unhelpful in relation to their proper function, which is to focus attention on legitimate aspects of criticism of the judgment of the court below. 

3. The appellant is unrepresented. He has produced written submissions which also are in template form and are also very unhelpful, except there is said to be a claim in respect of s 424A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). As far as anyone can make sense of it, this may be a complaint that the tribunal did not give the appellant written notice of such independent “country information” as it relied on.

4. The only such information referred to the capacity of India’s security services and to some materials about two dissident organisations, one of which the appellant had claimed to belong to in the state of Tamil Nadu in his country of nationality, India.  Even without the benefit of the recent decision of the High Court in SZBYR v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] HCA 26, this material would not fall within s 424A(3) as not being specifically about the appellant or any other individual person.

5. NARV v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 262, the case relied upon in the written submissions, was overturned by a Full Court of this Court in Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v NAMWU [2004] FCAFC 264.

6. Quite apart from the fact that the s 424A ground is now sought to be raised for the first time, there is nothing in it, and indeed the learned federal magistrate was, in my opinion, right for the reasons that he gave.

7. The appeal will be dismissed with costs, assessed in the sum of $2,500.00.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Madgwick.

Associate:

Dated:        28 August 2007

Counsel for the Applicant:	The applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr T Reilly
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	13 August 2007
Date of Judgment:	13 August 2007