Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Win v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 56 IMMIGRATION – Refugee Review Tribunal – whether letter from informant after hearing "information" within s 424 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether Tribunal entitled to take such "information" into account– whether s 425 required Tribunal to afford further hearing. WORDS AND PHRASES – "information". Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 424, 424A, 424B, 425.
Nader v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2000) 175 ALR 548, cited. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Cho (1999) 92 FCR 315, cited. De Silva v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2000) 98 FCR 364, cited.
ZAW NAING WIN v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 1189 of 2000 WHITLAM, TAMBERLIN & SACKVILLE JJ SYDNEY 9 FEBRUARY 2001
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1189 OF 2000
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: ZAW NAING WIN
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: WHITLAM, TAMBERLIN and SACKVILLE JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 9 FEBRUARY 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant 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
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1189 OF 2000
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: ZAW NAING WIN
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGES: WHITLAM, TAMBERLIN & SACKVILLE JJ
DATE: 9 FEBRUARY 2001
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT THE COURT: 1 This is an appeal from a judgment of a Judge of the Court, dismissing an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the RRT"). The RRT had affirmed a decision of a delegate of the respondent ("the Minister") refusing to grant the appellant, a citizen of Myanmar, a protection visa. 2 The appellant's principal contention is that the RRT was not entitled to take into account the contents of a letter described by the RRT and the primary Judge as the "dob-in letter". That letter contained material which, if accepted, cast doubt on the credibility of the appellant's account of events given in support of his claim to satisfy the definition of "refugee" in Article 1A(2) of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees ("the Convention").
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