Applicant M145/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 99

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant M145/2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 99

MIGRATION – application for leave to appeal – application for extension of time – whether denial of opportunity to respond to adverse country information. Applicant M115 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 98 APPLICANT M145/2003 V MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS V 1143 OF 2003 BEAUMONT, WEINBERG & CRENNAN JJ 7 MAY 2004 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 1143 OF 2003

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: APPLICANT M145/2003

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGES: BEAUMONT, WEINBERG & CRENNAN JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 7 MAY 2004

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applications for extension of time and for leave to appeal be refused. 2. The applicant 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

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 1143 OF 2003

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: APPLICANT M145/2003

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGES: BEAUMONT, WEINBERG & CRENNAN JJ

DATE: 6 MAY 2004

PLACE: MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

Introduction 1 This is an application for leave to appeal, and an application for an extension of time, from a judgment of a single Judge of this Court. 2 The applicant is a Sinhalese widow from Colombo (born in 1930) where she lives with her married son who spends most of his time abroad. Her residence in Colombo is one of a group of flats, where she is friendly with other residents, who are Tamils whom she has helped with food and support on occasions. She claims that the security forces regularly conducted searches at the flats. During these searches she would be questioned and accused of harbouring Tamils. She was accused of being pro Tamil, and a Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam ('LTTE') sympathiser. On three occasions, ammunition was found in the possession of Tamil residents. The soldiers were abusive and threatening to the applicant during these searches. On one occasion, in February 1995, the applicant was at home alone when her home was raided by the security forces and she was interrogated. A few days after this, she was visited by some Tamil youths, who accused her of providing information to the authorities about Tamil residents. They threatened her and advised her not to inform the authorities. A few days following this, the applicant became aware of the death of two Sinhalese people who were believed to have informed the authorities about the activities of Tamils in the applicant's group of flats. When another search by the authorities resulted in more Tamil arrests, the applicant began to fear for her safety. She began to receive threatening telephone calls and made arrangements to leave the country. The applicant came to Australia in March 1995. She fears that on return to Sri Lanka she will be persecuted by Tamils and members of the LTTE who believe she gave information to the authorities. The applicant also fears that she may be arbitrarily arrested by the security forces in future searches of her block of flats. 3 In 1997 (about two years and four months after her arrival), the applicant sought refugee status. 4 However, on 31 October 1997, the applicant's claim for a protection visa was refused by the Minister's delegate. The applicant then sought review of that decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal'). On 20 June 2000, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant a protection visa.