Applicant NAAW v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1919

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant NAAW v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1919 APPLICANT NAAW v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS N 1463 OF 2001 EMMETT J 10 DECEMBER 2001 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1463 OF 2001

BETWEEN: APPLICANT NAAW

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER: 10 DECEMBER 2001

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondents 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

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1463 OF 2001

BETWEEN: APPLICANT NAAW

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE: 10 DECEMBER 2001

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant is a citizen of Iran. He and his wife arrived in Australia on 28 March 2001. On 1 May 2001 a child was born to the applicant's wife. On 11 May 2001 the applicant lodged an application for a protection (class XA) visa with Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. On 27 July 2001 a delegate of the Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs ("the Minister") refused to grant a protection visa. On 1 August 2001 the applicant applied to the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") for a review of that decision. On 10 October 2001 the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision. On 29 October 2001 the applicant lodged an application for an order of review by this Court. 2 When the matter was called on for hearing today, the applicant appeared in person. He said that he had understood that Mr David Godwin of counsel, who had been giving assistance in connection with the Minister's pro bono scheme, would be appearing for him. However my associate confirmed by telephone that Mr Godwin, in accordance with the terms of the scheme, undertook to give no more than advice. The applicant has been assisted today by a Farsi interpreter. He did not make any submissions in support of his application. When asked if there was anything he wished to say, he invited me to decide the matter. 3 The application to the Court specifies three grounds as follows: 1. Procedures that were required by the Migration Act 1958 ("the Act") to be observed in connection with the making of a decision were not observed. 2. The decision involved an error of law being an error of law involving an incorrect interpretation of the applicable law or an incorrect application of the law to the facts as found by the person who made the decision. 3. There was no evidence or other material to justify the making of the decision.