SZRUR v Minister for Immigration

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) made by the applicant, SZRUR, a citizen of China. The applicant had applied for a protection visa, which was refused by a delegate of the Minister. The RRT subsequently affirmed this refusal. The applicant sought judicial review of the RRT's decision in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had been denied natural justice, specifically by failing to appear at a scheduled hearing before the RRT. This failure to appear led the RRT to make a decision under section 426A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) without further action to enable the applicant's appearance. The applicant contended that he was unaware of the hearing date because his nominated address for correspondence, which was that of a migration agent, had not resulted in him being informed.

The court considered the applicant's assertion that he had engaged a migration agent, Mr. Ricky Jiang, whose address was provided for correspondence. However, the application forms indicated that the applicant did not wish to appoint a representative. The court found no evidence that Mr. Jiang was appointed to act on the applicant's behalf or that he signed forms as such. Crucially, the court applied the principles established in *SZFDE v Minister for Immigration & Anor* [2007] HCA 35 and *Minister for Immigration & Anor v SZLIX* [2008] FCAFC 17, which require a high standard of proof for fraud. The court determined that there was insufficient evidence to establish that Mr. Jiang's actions, or omissions, constituted a fraud on the applicant or, by extension, a fraud on the Tribunal. The court noted that the applicant had provided no evidence of how Mr. Jiang was retained or that he was anything more than a "post-box" for correspondence, a role the applicant appeared to be aware of.

Consequently, the court found that the RRT had acted appropriately by proceeding under section 426A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) in the absence of the applicant. The application for review was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs, assessed at $4,000.00.