Applicant M135 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 522

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicant M135 of 2003 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 522 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte A (2001) 185 ALR 489 Applicant M115/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1448 Décor Corporation v Dart Industries (1991) 33 FCR 397 APPLICANT M135 OF 2003 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS V 348 OF 2004 SUNDBERG J 28 APRIL 2004 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 348 OF 2004

BETWEEN: APPLICANT M135 OF 2003

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SUNDBERG J

DATE OF ORDER: 28 APRIL 2004

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's 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

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 348 OF 2004

BETWEEN: APPLICANT M135 OF 2003

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: SUNDBERG J

DATE: 28 APRIL 2004

PLACE: MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 Application for leave to appeal from the decision of the Federal Magistrates Court dismissing an application for orders nisi for prohibition and certiorari directed to the Refugee Review Tribunal in respect of its affirmation of the respondent's decision to refuse the applicant a protection visa. 2 The application is supported by an affidavit by the applicant deposing that he arrived in Australia from Sri Lanka on 15 September 1997 and applied for a protection visa on 9 September 1998. The application was refused. The decision of the respondent was affirmed by the Refugee Review Tribunal. He says he joined in the Muin proceeding in the High Court, which was successful, and he was given leave to lodge his application in that Court on or before 31 May 2003. He says that on 18 March 2004 the Federal Magistrates Court "dismissed my appeal". The affidavit concludes: "I disagree with the decision of his Honour, Federal Magistrate McInnis on the grounds that the Tribunal misconstrued the definition of persecution and should have determined the findings with respect to those events that affected me in 1994 and made by the Tribunal amounted to findings of serious harm and persecution within the meaning of section 91R. The Tribunal also failed to recognise that those events amounted to persecution and was jurisdictional error."