SZKCL v Minister for Immigration
[2007] FMCA 380
•20 February 2007
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZKCL v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR | [2007] FMCA 380 |
| MIGRATION – Application for review of Refugee Review Tribunal decision – no arguable case raised – application dismissed. |
| Migration Act 1958 Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 rr. 44.12, 44.13 |
| Applicant: | SZKCL |
| First Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
| Second Respondent: | REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL |
| File number: | SYG 272 of 2007 |
| Judgment of: | Turner FM |
| Hearing date: | 20 February 2007 |
| Date of last submission: | 20 February 2007 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 20 February 2007 |
REPRESENTATION
| The applicant appeared in person |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Ms. M. Palmer of Sparke Helmore |
ORDERS
Pursuant to Rule 44.12 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules the application is dismissed as no arguable case has been raised.
The applicant is to pay the costs of the first respondent fixed in the amount of $1200.00.
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 272 of 2007
| SZKCL |
Applicant
And
| MINSTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS |
First Respondent
REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 30 January 2007 the applicant filed an application to show cause in this case why a remedy should not be granted in respect of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal dated 21 December 2006.
Rule 44.13 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 provide:
(1) At the hearing of an application to show cause, the applicant is confined to the relief sought and the grounds mentioned in the application.
(2) At a final hearing following a hearing under rule 44.12, the applicant is confined to the grounds specified in the Court’s order to show cause.
The grounds set out in the application are:
1. The decision involved an error of law in that: There is no evidence or the other materials to justify the making of the decision.
2. There is no sufficient evidence to conclude that I wan (sic) not ever involved in Falun Gong when I was in China.
3. I believe I am a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol.
The first respondent filed a response on 16 February 2007 as follows:
1. The application for judicial review does not provide any particulars or any legal ground of review.
2. The application for review does not establish any jurisdictional error in the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal dated 29 November 2006 and handed down on 21 December 2006.
3. The application for review does not raise an arguable case for the relief claimed pursuant to Part 44.12 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules and accordingly the application should be dismissed.
The applicant made no submissions in support of his application at the hearing on 20 February 2007.
The Court is not satisfied that the application has raised an arguable case. Therefore the application is dismissed pursuant to Rule 44.12 (1)(a).
I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Turner FM
Associate: Sarah James
Date: 21 March 2007
0
0
2