SZTDC v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

The applicant, a citizen of India, sought leave to appeal against the decision of the Federal Circuit Court, which affirmed the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) to refuse him a protection visa. The RRT had found the applicant not to be a credible witness due to the inconsistencies in his evidence. The applicant had claimed that he was a member of the Youth Congress in India and was targeted by members of the ruling party for his political activities. He claimed that he was attacked in 2011 and would be killed if returned to India. The Court was required to determine whether the applicant had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the appeal and whether there were reasonable prospects of success on appeal.

The Court found that the applicant had not provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the appeal. The applicant had claimed that it took him four weeks to prepare the required documentation, which included photographs of his involvement in political activities in India. The Court noted that the Tribunal had indicated a willingness to receive the material even after the two-week period, but the applicant was denied the opportunity to submit the material when he sought to provide it at the Tribunal’s office. The Court also found that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as the Tribunal’s reasons for finding the applicant not to be a credible witness were well founded. The applicant’s claims were inconsistent with the evidence he had provided, and the Court was not satisfied that the appeal would succeed.

The application for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal was refused. The applicant was ordered to pay the first respondent’s costs of and incidental to the application.