SZTND v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

[2015] HCASL 91

SZTND

v

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION & ANOR

[2015] HCASL 91
S42/2015

1. This is an application for special leave to appeal from an order of the Federal Court of Australia (Collier J) of 24 February 2015 dismissing an appeal from a judgment of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Judge Nicholls) given on 21 November 2014 dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") dated 18 October 2013, which affirmed a decision of the delegate of the first respondent to refuse to grant to the applicant a Protection (Class XA) visa ("protection visa").

2. The applicant is a male citizen of Bangladesh who arrived in Australia on 13 April 2012 as the holder of a Subclass TBE Short Stay (Offshore) (UC456) Business visa, valid until 12 July 2012.   In brief substance, the grounds of his application for a protection visa were that he claimed to fear being harmed in Bangladesh because of his membership of and activities on behalf of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party ("BNP"), and that he had left Bangladesh because he found it difficult to live there and feared persecution.

3. The applicant was denied a protection visa, and the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to do so, because it was not accepted that there was a real chance that the applicant would suffer serious or significant harm in Bangladesh for the reasons which he claimed.

4. Judge Nicholls dismissed the applicant's application for judicial review of the Tribunal's decision because none of the applicant's grounds for review established jurisdictional error.  The judge found that the Tribunal's findings were reasonably open on the evidence.  The applicant's claim that the Tribunal was biased was not substantiated.  And the Tribunal had not failed to consider any aspect of the applicant's claims.

5. On appeal to the Federal Court, Collier J similarly held that, despite an apparent "disconnect" between the lack of a specific finding by the Tribunal that a letter of 13 August 2012 signed by the President of the BNP Ward No 41 was not authentic and the Tribunal's conclusion that facts referred to in the letter were unreliable, the weight to be given to evidence before the Tribunal was essentially a matter for the Tribunal and it was not established that the Tribunal had committed a jurisdictional error.   

6. The applicant's sole proposed ground of appeal to this Court is:

   "His Honour Collier [sic] accepted the findings of the Refugee Review Tribunal as well as the findings of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.  His Honour failed to question the Tribunal which accepted that I was a BNP supporter and the position I held was not accepted.  Such finding by the Tribunal and other Courts is error of law because it is based on error of facts.  Therefore I have a strong arguable case and hope that the High Court of Australia will consider my application."

7. The applicant does not have legal representation and so the application falls to be determined pursuant to r 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004.

8. The applicant advances no arguable ground of appeal against the judgment of Collier J.  An appeal to this Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of special leave.

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

K.M. Hayne
13 May 2015 G.A.A. Nettle