SZCQH v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 259

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZCQH v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 259 SZCQH v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs N 1933 of 2004 JACOBSON J 10 MARCH 2005 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1933 OF 2004

BETWEEN: SZCQH

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER: 10 MARCH 2005

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The matter be adjourned to a date to be fixed, and the registry will advise the parties of a new hearing date for the application for leave to appeal.

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 1933 OF 2004

BETWEEN: SZCQH

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION, MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: JACOBSON J

DATE: 10 MARCH 2005

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1. This is an application for leave to appeal from the orders and judgment of Federal Magistrate Nicholls, given on 3 December 2004. The Federal Magistrate apparently gave an extempore judgment, but his written reasons were only produced today. Neither the applicant, nor the respondent, Mr Reynolds of Clayton Utz appearing for the Minister, has yet seen the written reasons of the Federal Magistrate. 2. The applicant has requested time to read and consider the reasons of the Federal Magistrate. Mr Reynolds did put to me that a factor in the exercise of the discretion to grant leave is whether the applicant can demonstrate some arguable case of jurisdictional error in the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal. There is some force in that submission which was not addressed by the applicant and it appears that the applicant has had the reasons of the RRT for a significant period of time. 3. Nevertheless, it seems to me to be clear that I cannot force the applicant to proceed with his application today when he has not yet seen the reasons for judgment of the Federal Magistrate. 4. Accordingly, the order I will make is that the matter be sent to the Registry for allocation of a further date for the hearing. 5. I will take steps today to ensure that both the applicant and the respondent are provided with copies of the reasons for judgment of Federal Magistrate Nicholls. My associate has copies in Court and I will have them handed to the parties.