NACB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 236

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NACB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 236 APPLICANT NACB OF 2001 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS No N 142 of 2002 SPENDER, MOORE, KIEFEL JJ SYDNEY 14 AUGUST 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 142 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: APPLICANT NACB of 2001

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SPENDER, MOORE, KIEFEL JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 14 AUGUST 2002

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 142 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA BETWEEN: APPLICANT NACB of 2001

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SPENDER, MOORE, KIEFEL JJ

DATE: 14 AUGUST 2002

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT THE COURT: 1 This is an appeal from a decision of a judge of the Court, Stone J, given on 6 February 2002 dismissing an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). On 25 October 2001, the Tribunal affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent, which decision was made nearly four years before on 27 November 1997, refusing the appellant a protection visa. 2 When the appeal was called on this morning there was no appearance by or on behalf of the appellant. The Court notes that the appellant was informed by letter dated 27 May 2002 that the appeal would be listed for hearing here on Wednesday, 14 August 2002 at 10.15 am, yet the appellant has not sought to prosecute his appeal. For that reason the appeal should be dismissed. Notwithstanding that, the Court has carefully looked at the material the subject of the present appeal. 3 The appellant is a national of Bangladesh. He arrived in Australia on 2 September 1997 after informing the Australian High Commissioner in Dhaka that he wanted to come to Australia to take part in martial arts shows. He claimed to fear persecution in Bangladesh from the Awami League because of his membership of a political party called the Freedom Party which he joined in 1989. At the Tribunal hearing, the appellant further claimed that he feared harm because "he had been an opponent of drug users and suppliers".