Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
P v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 543
MIGRATION – protection visa – member of Iraqi opposition party – relocated to northern Iraq and subsequently Syria – travelled to Australia – effective protection available in Syria and northern Iraq – challenge to Tribunal's findings of fact adverse to refugee status on basis that effective third country protection and internal relocation available – no reviewable ground disclosed – application dismissed. P v THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS W 35 of 2000 FRENCH J 28 APRIL 2000 PERTH
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W35 OF 2000
BETWEEN: P
Applicant
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: FRENCH J
DATE OF ORDER: 28 APRIL 2000
WHERE MADE: PERTH
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application is dismissed.
2. The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs of the application.
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 W35 OF 2000
BETWEEN: P
Applicant
AND: THE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
Respondent
JUDGE: FRENCH J
DATE: 28 APRIL 2000
PLACE: PERTH
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction 1 P is a citizen of Iraq. He arrived in Australia by boat without any travel documentation on 13 August 1999. He lodged an application for a protection visa with the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on 21 September 1999. That application was refused by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on 8 November 1999. On the following day, P applied for review of that decision to the Refuge Review Tribunal. On 23 February 2000, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant him a visa. P, who is in the Immigration Detention Centre at Port Hedland, filed an application for an order for review of the Tribunal's decision on 2 March 2000. The application was in a common form, with common form grounds of review frequently used by applicants for refugee status who are detained at Port Hedland. The stated grounds of the application are: "(a) The decision involved an error of law, being an error involving the incorrect interpretation of the applicable law or an incorrect application of the law to the facts as found by the Tribunal or both. (b) The decision involved an error of law in that the Tribunal made findings of fact upon which its decision was based that were not rationally supported by probative evidence and it failed to rationally consider the probative evidence that was before it."
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate