VUAD of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 186

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VUAD of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 186

MIGRATION – appeal – constitutional writ relief – application out of time for writs of certiorari and mandamus – no time limits for prohibition as primary remedy sought – unnecessary for primary judge to decide whether prohibition is the primary remedy where application for constitutional writ relief doomed to fail – whether orders of primary judge were final or interlocutory – leave to rely on fresh evidence refused Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 417, 198 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 27 VUAD of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2003] FCA 1331 referred to Thayananthan v Minister of Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1054 referred to Re Ruddock; Ex parte Reyes [2000] HCA 66, (2000) 75 ALJR 465 referred to APPLICANT VUAD OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS & ANOR V1087 OF 2003 GRAY, MOORE & EMMETT JJ 16 JULY 2004 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V1087 OF 2003

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

BETWEEN: APPLICANT VUAD OF 2003

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

JOHN VRACHNAS IN HIS CAPACITY AS CONSTITUTING THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGES: GRAY, MOORE & EMMETT JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 16 JULY 2004

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. If leave to appeal is required, such leave is refused.

2. If leave to appeal is not required, the appeal is dismissed.

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

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.