SZROZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2012] HCASL 190

SZROZ

v

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR

[2012] HCASL 190
S232/2012

1. The applicant is a citizen of India and arrived in Australia on 15 November 2010.  He applied for a Protection (Class XA) visa on 24 December 2010.  On 24 March 2011, a delegate of the first respondent refused to grant that visa.

2. On 2 August 2011, the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") affirmed the delegate's decision.  The applicant claimed to have been a member of the Communist Party of India.  He claimed to have been tortured by an activist group after witnessing the murder of a civilian by members of that group.  He also attested to having spoken out against violence perpetrated by members of another group.  The applicant claimed to fear persecution at the hands of those groups, as well as the Communist Party, from which he had resigned.  The Tribunal found the applicant to be lacking in credibility due to a number of inconsistencies and deficiencies in his account. 

3. On 14 March 2012, the Federal Magistrates Court (Smith FM) dismissed an application for review of the Tribunal's decision.  The grounds of review focussed on a report put before the Tribunal, which was said to have stated that the applicant suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder.  The applicant claimed that the Tribunal had paid insufficient regard to the impact of that condition on his ability to give evidence and had thereby failed to accord him a meaningful hearing.  Smith FM found that the Tribunal gave ample consideration to the report and had discharged its obligations to the applicant.   

4. On 3 August 2012, the Federal Court of Australia (Gilmour J) dismissed the applicant's appeal against the decision of Smith FM.  Gilmour J held that it had been open to the Tribunal to find that the applicant was not a credible witness and that there were no grounds for revisiting that finding.  His Honour also observed that the applicant's notice of appeal was in the nature of a template document which sought to agitate issues unrelated to those raised below.

5. The applicant seeks special leave to appeal to this Court.  His application focuses in large part on the merits of the Tribunal's decision.  To the extent that it raises grounds concerning questions of law, those grounds are not particularised.  The applicant does not make out any basis for doubting the correctness of the decisions below. 

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

S.M. Kiefel
12 December 2012 S.J. Gageler