Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SBBI v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 552 MIGRATION – application for review of RRT decision – whether RRT erred in concluding that there was no real chance of persecution if applicant is returned to Afghanistan in view of the change in political situation – whether RRT erred in deciding that it had no jurisdiction to determine whether applicant could remain in Australia while the political situation in Afghanistan improves – whether RRT erred in finding that the political situation in Afghanistan has improved – whether RRT ignored relevant material Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 474 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)s 39B Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559 cited SBBI v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS S15 OF 2002 TAMBERLIN J SYDNEY (HEARD IN ADELAIDE) 10 MAY 2002
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S15 OF 2002
BETWEEN: SBBI
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J
DATE OF ORDER: 10 MAY 2002
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application is 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
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S15 OF 2002
BETWEEN: SBBI
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: TAMBERLIN J
DATE: 10 MAY 2002
PLACE: SYDNEY (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant is a citizen of Afghanistan who arrived in Australia on 30 June 2001. At the time of arrival he was seventeen years of age having been born in 1984. On 9 August 2001, he applied for a protection visa as a refugee and on 18 October 2001, the delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs ("the Minister") decided that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of such a visa and refused the application. The applicant then sought review of the decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the RRT") on 22 October 2001. On 21 December 2001 the RRT found that the applicant was not a person to whom Australia has protection obligations. The applicant then sought review of the RRT's decision from this Court. 2 The applicant claimed that he fears persecution from the Taliban in Afghanistan because he is a Pashtun and that as such, if he returned to Afghanistan, he would be forced to fight because of his ethnicity. He said that he had to flee Afghanistan to escape conscription by the Taliban who were seeking him. He also claimed that he would attract adverse attention from the opponents of the Taliban such as the Northern Alliance/United Front because he was a Pashtun. He claimed that he would be singled out for adverse treatment on the basis that he had sought asylum in Australia. 3 The applicant claims that his father had been abducted and disappeared and that his uncle had been beaten and that his cousin was killed by the Taliban. These claims were not accepted by the RRT.
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