Okyere, Stephen Osei Yaw v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1997] FCA 137

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G222 of 1995 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: STEPHEN OSEI YAW OKYERE Applicant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS First Respondent JUDGE MAKING ORDER: LOCKHART J. WHERE ORDER MADE: SYDNEY DATE ORDER MADE: 28 FEBRUARY 1997 MINUTE OF ORDER THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application is dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the costs of the respondent of the proceeding. NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

CATCHWORDS IMMIGRATION - application to review decision not to grant a protection visa - whether applicant faces a real chance of persecution - whether there was a failure to take into account a relevant consideration Migration Act 1958: ss 476(1)(e),(3)(e) Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321 Buck v Bavone (1976) 135 CLR 110 Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Limited (1986) 162 CLR 24 Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Sian Liang (1996) 70 ALJR 568 Turner v The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1981) 35 ALR 388 STEPHEN OSEI YAW OKYERE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS G 222 of 1995 LOCKHART J. SYDNEY 28 FEBRUARY 1997

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G222 of 1995 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: STEPHEN OSEI YAW OKYERE Applicant AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS Respondent 28 February 1997 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT LOCKHART J. This is an application by Stephen Osei Yaw Okyere to review the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (constituted by Roslyn Smidt) dated 10 March 1995 whereby the Tribunal found that the applicant is not a refugee and affirmed the decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs under the Migration Act 1958 ('the Act') that the applicant, a citizen of Ghana, is not eligible for grant of a protection visa. The application of the applicant for a protection visa was lodged with the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. The applicant attacked the Tribunal's decision on the ground that it involved an error of law. Specifically, the applicant argued in his written submissions that: (a) the Tribunal failed to take a relevant consideration into account in the exercise of its power (s. 5(2)(b) of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977); and (b) in the course of the Tribunal's conduct it failed to take a relevant consideration into account in the exercise of its power (Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act: s. 6(2)(b)). However, at the hearing the applicant sought to review the decision under s. 476(1)(e) of the Migration Act 1958. That section allows an application to be made for review by the Federal Court of a judicially-reviewable decision on the basis: 'that the decision involved an error of law, being an error involving an incorrect interpretation of the law to the facts as found by the person who made the decision, whether or not the error appears on the record of the decision.'