Applicants S69 of 2004 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1465

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Applicants S69 of 2004 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1465 APPLICANTS S69 OF 2004 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS, PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND MR KENNETH NORTHWOOD, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD554 OF 2004 BENNETT J 27 OCTOBER 2004 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD554 OF 2004

BETWEEN: APPLICANTS S69 OF 2004

APPLICANTS

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

MR KENNETH NORTHWOOD, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

THIRD RESPONDENT JUDGE: BENNETT J

DATE OF ORDER: 27 OCTOBER 2004

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be dismissed. 2. The applicants pay the respondents' costs. 3. The applicants not be permitted to file any further application seeking review of the Tribunal's decision dated 28 June 2002 and handed down on 23 July 2002 without the leave of the court. 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 NSD554 OF 2004

BETWEEN: APPLICANTS S69 OF 2004

APPLICANTS

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

MR KENNETH NORTHWOOD, MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE: BENNETT J

DATE: 27 OCTOBER 2004

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 On 8 March 2004 the applicants filed in the High Court this application for an order nisi seeking injunctions, mandamus and certiorari. On 13 April 2004, the High Court remitted this application to the Federal Court. It is not the first time that the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') in relation to these applicants has been before this Court. 2 The applicants are husband, wife and child. They are nationals of India who arrived in Australia on 15 March 1999. On 13 April 1999, they lodged an application for protection (class AZ) visas. On 31 May 1999, that application was refused by a delegate of the first respondent ('the delegate'). On 23 June 1999, the applicants applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision. 3 The procedural history of this matter is of some relevance: (a) On 28 June 2002, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision. On 23 July 2002, the Tribunal handed down its decision. (b) On 4 October 2002, Sackville J dismissed an application to this Court to set aside the Tribunal's decision. The applicant was legally represented before Sackville J. (c) On 11 March 2003, the Full Court dismissed an appeal from Sackville J's decision. (d) The applicant applied to the High Court for special leave to appeal. In refusing special leave on 13 February 2004, McHugh J said: 'The Court has carefully considered the judgment of the Refugee Review Tribunal, the judgments in the Full Court, the written submissions filed by the applicant and his oral submissions in support of his case today. We are of the view that no error is shown in the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal and that an appeal would have no prospects of success.'