SZOWX v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2011] HCASL 203

SZOWX
v
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR
[2011] HCASL 203
S274/2011

1. The applicant, a Malaysian citizen and of ethnic Chinese origin, entered Australia on 29 June 2008 and applied for a protection visa on 11 June 2010.  A delegate of the first respondent refused the applicant's application for a protection visa on 9 September 2010.  The second respondent, the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal"), affirmed the delegate's decision on 30 November 2010.

2. The applicant claimed that, as an ethnic Chinese, she was discriminated against by native Malaysians who, inter alia, required her to pay more for property.  The applicant claimed that she also feared harm from the Malaysian authorities.  The applicant stated that Malaysia was not a safe place for ethnic Chinese women as they are often abducted by Malays and Indians.

3. The Tribunal rejected the claims of the applicant, finding that there was not enough evidence before it to be satisfied that the applicant had a well founded fear of persecution.  The Tribunal accepted that, while ethnic Chinese are subject to discrimination in Malaysia, there was insufficient information regarding the risk of abduction.  It was not satisfied that the applicant was at risk of harm from authorities in Malaysia, the army or the police.

4. The applicant sought judicial review of the Tribunal's decision in the Federal Magistrates Court (Nicholls FM), claiming that the Tribunal fell into jurisdictional error by failing to properly consider her claim, and was afflicted by bias.  On 31 March 2011, Nicholls FM dismissed the applicant's claims.    

5. The applicant then appealed to the Federal Court.  On 3 August 2011, Collier J dismissed the appeal. 

6. The applicant now seeks special leave to appeal to this Court from the decision of the Federal Court.  However, the application does not advance any questions of law that justify a grant of special leave to appeal.  The application does not identify any error of law in the reasoning of the Federal Court and there are no prospects of success on an appeal.  Special leave is refused.

7. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

W.M.C. Gummow
1 December 2011 S.M. Kiefel