SZTEV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2015] FCA 1325

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZTEV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 1325

Citation:	SZTEV v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 1325
Appeal from:	SZTEV v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2014] FCCA 1774
Parties:	SZTEV v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION and ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
File number:	NSD 888 of 2014
Judge:	JESSUP J
Date of judgment:	25 November 2015
Legislation:	Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
Date of hearing:	25 November 2015
Place:	Sydney
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	5
Counsel for the Appellant:	The appellant appeared in person with the assistance of an interpreter
Counsel for the Respondents:	Mr K Eskerie
Solicitor for the Respondents:	Sparke Helmore

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 888 of 2014

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZTEV
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION
First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE OF ORDER:	25 NOVEMBER 2015
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The name of the second respondent be amended to read “Administrative Appeals Tribunal”.

2.The appeal be dismissed.

3.The appellant pay the first respondent’s costs. 

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 888 of 2014

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

SZTEV
Appellant

AND:

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION
First Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Second Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE:	25 NOVEMBER 2015
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia given on 18 August 2014, in which the appellant’s application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal made on 22 July 2013 was dismissed.  In that decision, the Tribunal had affirmed an earlier decision of a delegate of the respondent Minister not to grant the appellant a Protection (Class XA) Visa under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

2. The appellant, who was unrepresented before me today, made no submissions in support of the only two grounds set out in his Notice of Appeal dated 29 August 2014.  Neither did the appellant file an outline of submissions in support of his appeal.  Having considered those two grounds and having taken into account the submissions made on behalf of the Minister, I am satisfied that the only proper course for the court to follow is to reject those grounds.

3. In his oral submissions today, the appellant dealt with two matters.  First, he contended that the Tribunal had not considered so much of his claim as was based on his evidence before it that some people who were ill-disposed towards him visited his parents-in-law’s house on 13 April 2012, looking for him.  I reject that contention.  That evidence was taken into account by the Tribunal, but it was not believed specifically in relation to this aspect of the appellant’s case in the Tribunal.  The Tribunal found that the appellant was not a witness of truth. 

4. Secondly, the appellant pointed out to me in his oral submissions, without evidence, that a recent threat has been made by the now husband of his ex-wife that he, the husband, would kill him, the appellant, if he had the opportunity.  The appellant made it clear that this threat post-dated both the hearing in the Tribunal and the proceeding in the Federal Circuit Court.  It cannot, therefore, be of any relevance to the only case which he ran and was able to run in that court, namely, that the Tribunal constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction by omitting to give consideration to each of the integers of his claims. 

5. For those reasons, I dismiss the appeal.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Jessup.

Associate:

Dated:        3 December 2015