Ali v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1794

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Ali v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1794

AZHAR ALI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 806 OF 1999 JUDGE: SACKVILLE J PLACE: SYDNEY DATE: 17 DECEMBER 1999

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 806 OF 1999

BETWEEN: AZHAR ALI

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SACKVILLE J

DATE OF ORDER: 17 DECEMBER 1999

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings. 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 806 OF 1999

BETWEEN: AZHAR ALI

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SACKVILLE J

DATE: 17 DECEMBER 1999

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The Application 1 The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan, born on 15 April 1972. He arrived in Australia on 16 November 1997, and applied for a protection visa with the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on 30 December 1997. On 10 March 1998, a delegate of the respondent (the "Minister") refused to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant applied to the Refugee Review Tribunal ("RRT") on 31 March 1998 for review of that decision. On 5 July 1999, the RRT affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant a protection visa. On 18 August 1999, the applicant filed an application to this court applying for review of the RRT's decision. 2 The application, which is handwritten, claims that the Urdu interpreter at the RRT hearing had misunderstood some of the answers given by the applicant to questions asked by the RRT member. The interpreter is said to have misunderstood the applicant's qualifications; to have incorrectly stated the number of relatives he has in Pakistan; to have failed to communicate that the applicant had lost his passport in a ship in Dubai; and to have failed to mention that the applicant's conversion from the Shia to the Sunni version of Islam was a slow and gradual process. I should add that today the applicant has indicated that he prepared the handwritten application in English without assistance. 3 At the first directions hearing in this matter, held on 9 September 1999, it was explained to the applicant that if he wished to rely on inadequacies in interpretation as a ground of review it would be necessary for him to produce evidence of those inadequacies. It was for this reason that a direction was made that the Minister provide the applicant with a tape recording of the RRT hearing. The applicant has accepted that the Minister complied with this direction and that he did receive a tape recording of the proceedings before the Tribunal. 4 A second directions hearing was held on 25 November 1999. The applicant did not attend that directions hearing. He has said today that he came to the building but somehow did not make his way to the courtroom. In any event the directions made on that day were communicated to the applicant in a letter sent by the Australian Government Solicitor to him on 25 November 1999. That letter indicated that the time for the applicant to file and serve any affidavit in support of his application had been extended to 3 December 1999. It also indicated that the applicant was to file and serve written submissions by 10 December 1999.