WADP of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 328

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WADP of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs

[2002] FCAFC 328

APPELLANT WADP OF 2002 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS W182 of 2002 FRENCH, CARR & FINN JJ 31 OCTOBER 2002 PERTH (AND BY VIDEO-LINK TO CANBERRA)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W182 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: APPELLANT WADP OF 2002

Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

JUDGES: FRENCH, CARR & FINN JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 31 OCTOBER 2002

WHERE MADE: PERTH (and by video-link to Canberra)

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

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W182 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: APPELLANT WADP OF 2002

Appellant

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

JUDGES: FRENCH, CARR & FINN JJ

DATE: 31 OCTOBER 2002

PLACE: PERTH (and by video-link to Canberra)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT THE COURT: INTRODUCTION 1 This is an appeal from a judgment of a judge of this Court given on 31 May 2002. The learned primary judge dismissed the appellant's application, filed on 3 January 2002, for an order of review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") made on 21 December 2001, affirming a decision of a delegate of the respondent not to grant the appellant a protection visa.

The appellant's claims 2 The appellant's claims to be entitled to protection as a refugee were set out in the Tribunal's reasons. They were substantially repeated in the primary judge's reasons. There is no need to repeat the details of the claims, but we will summarise them. 3 The appellant is a citizen of Iran. His claims for refugee status were based on persecution feared by him by reason of political opinion. That in turn was based upon the appellant's claims to belong to a pro-monarchist group and to have taken a prominent part in demonstrations in Iran. The Iranian authorities had also discovered that he had financially supported the pro-monarchist group. The appellant claimed to have been tortured over a period of 3 months in 1989, to have received a 3 year suspended prison sentence in 1991 and to have been placed on a black list. He fled Iran, via Turkey, soon after taking part in the student demonstrations in Shiraz in July 1999. This coincided with the discovery by the Iranian authorities of the fact that he had been a financial supporter of the monarchist party.