SZMOY v Minister for Immigration
[2018] FCCA 532
•9 March 2018
FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SZMOY v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION | [2018] FCCA 532 |
| Catchwords: MIGRATION – Judicial review of rejection by officer of Department of Immigration and Border Protection of application for protection visa on the ground the applicant had previously been refused the grant of a protection visa – whether previous application for a protection visa was not a valid application for a protection visa because of the form by which it was made - application dismissed. |
| Legislation: Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss.48A, 48B |
| Applicant: | SZMOY |
| Respondent: | MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION |
| File Number: | SYG 1520 of 2016 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Manousaridis |
| Hearing date: | 11 August 2017 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 11 August 2017 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 9 March 2018 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr O Jones |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Adrien Joel & Co. |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Mr A Markus |
ORDERS
The application is dismissed.
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYG 1520 of 2016
| SZMOY |
Applicant
And
| MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & BORDER PROTECTION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This application for judicial review, which was heard together with SMOX v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection,[1] is directed to the rejection by an officer of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection of the lodgement on behalf of the applicant on 23 May 2016 of an application for a protection visa. The officer rejected the application by letter dated 1 June 2016.
[1] [2018] FCCA 533
The officer stated that the application was not a valid application for a protection visa because a decision had previously been made to refuse the applicant a protection visa and, in those circumstances, s.48A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Act) prevents the applicant from making a further application for a protection visa unless, acting under s.48B of the Act, the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection determines s.48A does not apply.
In his application for judicial review, the applicant claims the officer was wrong to reject the application for a protection visa because the application for a protection visa which the applicant had previously lodged on 11 March 2014, and which had been rejected, was itself not a valid application for a visa. The ground on which the applicant claims the previous application for a protection visa was not a valid application for a protection visa is that the only valid form the applicant could have used to make an application was Form 866 as it existed as at 20 October 1999; but the applicant used a different version of Form 866 which the Minister had purportedly approved after 1999.
The submissions in support of this ground are extensive. It is unnecessary, however, for me to set out these submissions or consider them because submissions to the same effect have been considered and rejected, not only by judges of this Court, but also by Burley J in the Federal Court.[2] Given the judgments of Burley J, the application is bound to fail.
[2] See, for example, BVJ16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1205; BLR15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 67; CNP16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 65; CDI15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 58
I propose, therefore, to order that the application be dismissed.
I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Manousaridis
Date: 9 March 2018
5
2