SZJJP v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2008] FCA 122

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZJJP v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 122

SZJJP v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
NSD 1965 OF 2007

TAMBERLIN J
20 FEBRUARY 2008
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 1965 OF 2007

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZJJP
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	TAMBERLIN J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 FEBRUARY 2008
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The appeal be dismissed with costs.

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 1965 OF 2007

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZJJP
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP
First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	TAMBERLIN J
DATE:	20 FEBRUARY 2008
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This an appeal from the decision of a Federal Magistrate refusing judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), which in turn affirmed a decision of a delegate of the first respondent to refuse an application for a protection visa under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The notice of appeal simply alleges that the Tribunal ignored and overlooked the facts of the case and thereby fell into jurisdictional error.

2. This Court, as with the Federal Magistrate, only has power to review the decision of the Tribunal in circumstances where there was jurisdictional error.  The fact that the Tribunal may have ignored or taken a view said to be incorrect in relation to the facts does not of itself establish that there has been jurisdictional error.  On a fair reading of the Tribunal’s decision, there is nothing which indicates that any facts have been ignored or overlooked, nor did he appellant identify any such facts which the Tribunal ought to have taken into account.

3. In essence, the appellant requests that this Court grant an appeal from the decision of the Federal Magistrate on the basis that findings of facts made by the Tribunal should be revisited.  No basis has been shown for doing this.  The case before the Tribunal turned on the factual situation before it, and simply because the Tribunal disbelieved the evidence given by the appellant and thus made findings of fact adverse to the appellant’s case does not ground a basis for review by this Court.

4. For these reasons, the decision of the Federal Magistrate must be upheld, since no error has been shown in either that decision or the decision of the Tribunal.

5. Accordingly, I dismiss this appeal with costs.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Tamberlin.

Associate:

Dated:        20 February 2008

The appellant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms B. Nolan
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore Lawyers
Date of Hearing:	20 February 2008
Date of Judgment:	20 February 2008