SZLZS v Minister for Immigration
[2017] FCCA 2578
•25 October 2017
FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZLZS v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION | [2017] FCCA 2578 |
| Catchwords: MIGRATION – Application for a Protection (Class XA) – Form 866 – whether valid application for protection – application dismissed. |
| Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss.48A, 476, 477 Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.44.12 |
| Cases cited: BVJ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1205 |
| Applicant: | SZLZS |
| Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION |
| File Number: | SYG 789 of 2017 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Street |
| Hearing date: | 25 October 2017 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 25 October 2017 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 25 October 2017 |
REPRESENTATION
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Mr A Joel Adrian Joel & Co |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Mr A Markus Australian Government Solicitor |
ORDERS
The application is dismissed.
The applicant pay the respondent’s costs fixed in the amount of $2,300.00.
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 789 of 2017
| SZLZS |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is an application under s 476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (“the Act”) for judicial review of a decision of an Officer of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection made on 22 February 2017 to the effect that an application for a protection visa lodged on behalf of the applicant on 20 February 2017 was not a valid application by virtue of s 48A of the Act.
The application for review was filed on 16 March 2017 within the time permitted under s 477(1) of the Act. The substantive issue raised by the applicant in the present case is relevantly identical to issues raised in a number of proceedings in this Court, to date all of which have been determined to the effect that the Form 866 is not on the proper construction of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), frozen as at 20 October 1999, and/or that there has been substantial compliance with the requirements of the Act in relation to the application.
The arguments have been dismissed by decision of the learned Burley J in BVJ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1205. That decision is binding on this Court and accordingly, the application cannot succeed. The Court notes that if there are future applications of this kind they should be the subject of an interlocutory application for summary dismissal, and/or an application under r 44.12 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 for dismissal insofar as this Court is concerned. Accordingly, the application is not one that is capable of making out relevant jurisdictional error in respect of the non-reviewable decision that would be within this Court’s jurisdiction if jurisdictional error was established.
The application is accordingly dismissed.
I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Street
Associate:
Date: 8 November 2017
1
3