SZJML v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
[2008] HCASL 556
SZJML
v
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR
[2008] HCASL 556
S350/2008
The applicant, a national of the People's Republic of China, arrived in Australia in August 2004 and applied for a protection visa. He claimed to be a refugee, entitled to protection in accordance with the Refugees Convention and Protocol. A delegate of the Minister refused the application.
The applicant claimed he feared persecution on the basis of his practice of Falun Gong. He claimed to have been detained and physically mistreated over several days in 1999, and that he was forced to leave his employment on this account.
The applicant sought review by the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal"). An original decision of the Tribunal in 2005 was set aside by order of Justice Jacobson of the Federal Court of Australia for non-compliance with s 424A(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). A differently constituted Tribunal subsequently affirmed the decision of the Minister’s delegate. It rejected the applicant's claim to fear persecution on the basis that he was a practitioner of Falun Gong. The Tribunal rejected that claim, concluding that the applicant's evidence of Falun Gong was vague and lacking in detail. It noted that the applicant had been able to depart China without difficulty. It concluded that he was not entitled to protection obligations.
The applicant sought judicial review from the Federal Magistrates Court. In that court, Barnes FM rejected the argument of error and bias on the part of the Tribunal, as well as complaints of breach of s 424 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). Her Honour concluded that the Tribunal had made no jurisdictional error and dismissed the application.
This decision was confirmed on appeal to the Federal Court constituted by Reeves J. His Honour concluded that, even if any factual errors could be made out, they were not of a kind that disclosed any jurisdictional error. The appeal was dismissed.
The applicant's draft notice of appeal in this Court is of a template variety, repeating the grounds disposed of below. Were special leave to appeal granted, there would be no prospects of success. The case is simply one involving a challenge to the determination of the facts. No point of law or other point of importance is presented. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
Pursuant to Rule 41.10.5 of the High Court Rules we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.
M. D. Kirby J. D. Heydon 2 December 2008
0
0
0