Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Soebandi v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 781
SOEBANDI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 351 of 2001 SACKVILLE J SYDNEY 22 JUNE 2001
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 351 OF 2001
BETWEEN: SOEBANDI
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: SACKVILLE J
DATE OF ORDER: 22 JUNE 2001
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant 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 351 OF 2001
BETWEEN: SOEBANDI
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: SACKVILLE J
DATE: 22 JUNE 2001
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE PROCEEDINGS 1 This is an application to review a decision made by the Refugee Review Tribunal ("RRT") made on 8 March 2001. The RRT affirmed a decision of the Minister's delegate not to grant the applicant a protection visa. 2 The applicant is not legally represented. His application to this Court identified two grounds: "1. The decision was induced or affected by actual bias of the [RRT member]. 2. There was no evidence or other materials to justify the making of the decision." Each of the grounds relied upon by the applicant is available as a ground of review of the RRT's decision: Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 476(1), (f) (actual bias) (g) (no evidence); see also s 476(4), which limits the scope of s 476(1)(g).
BACKGROUND 3 The applicant is a citizen of Indonesia, from Bakasi Timur, now aged 56. He is a single man of Chinese ethnicity and is a Christian. He completed six years education in Indonesia and for a period of some ten years before leaving that country worked at a timber mill owned by his brother-in-law. 4 The applicant arrived in Australia on 12 March 1999, on a visitor's visa. He lodged an application for a protection visa on 19 April 1999. This application was refused by the Minister's delegate on 13 October 1999. As I have noted, the delegate's decision was affirmed by the RRT on 8 March 2001. 5 The applicant claimed before the RRT that he feared he would become a victim of violence in Indonesia because of his Chinese ethnicity and the fact that he is Christian. In particular, he claimed that the timber mill at which he had been employed had been burned down during riots in 1998 and that he had not worked after that time. He also claimed that he had been beaten by rioters and suffered injuries during the disturbances. He said that he had suffered injuries when a fight occurred between mill workers and the rioters who had set fire to the mill. According to the applicant, his brother-in-law, the mill owner, had been killed during the attack. The applicant said that he had been taken to hospital and thereafter stayed with friends until he left for Australia.
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