Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
S516 of 2003 v Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 502 S516 OF 2003 v REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ANOR N 2534 OF 2003 EMMETT J 9 FEBRUARY 2004 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 2534 OF 2003
ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: S516 OF 2003
APPLICANT
AND: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER: 9 FEBRUARY 2004
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. the application for an order nisi be refused; 2. the applicant pay the Minister's cost of the proceeding. 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 2534 OF 2003
ON REMITTAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: S516 OF 2003
APPLICANT
AND: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
FIRST RESPONDENT
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE: EMMETT J
DATE: 9 FEBRUARY 2004
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 25 September 2003 the applicant filed a draft order nisiin the High Court supported by an affidavit sworn on 23 September 2003. The applicant claimed prerogative writ relief in respect of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') made on 18 June 1997. The affidavit discloses no evidence of any basis upon which relief could be granted. 2 On 3 November 2003 the solicitors for the Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs ('the Minister') wrote to the solicitors for the applicant indicating that there appeared to be no basis for the relief claimed, suggesting that the matter be remitted to this Court and indicating that the letter would be relied upon in any future application for costs. When the matter was called on for directions today the solicitor for the applicant indicated a desire to file an amended application disclosing some basis for relief. I consider it more appropriate to dispose of the order nisiapplication. If any further application for relief is to be filed, that can be done in a form that discloses some cause of action. I consider it appropriate to order that the applicant pay the Minister's costs of the proceeding to date.
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